STEVEN D COLQUHOUN VS UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: BC629862    Hearing Date: March 16, 2020    Dept: 34

SUBJECT: Petition to Confirm Arbitration Award

Moving Party: Petitioner/Defendant University of Southern California

Resp. Party: None

The petition to confirm arbitration award is GRANTED.

BACKGROUND:

On August 6, 2018, Plaintiff Steven D. Colquhoun commenced this action against Defendant University of Southern California for fraud and misrepresentation.

On September 2, 2016, Plaintiff filed his first amended complaint against Defendant for (1) fraud and misrepresentation; and (2) promissory estoppel. Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s agents made false promises and misrepresentations when offering Plaintiff an employment position with Defendant.

On December 21, 2016, the Court granted Defendant’s motion for an order compelling arbitration and staying this action.

On February 13, 2020, Defendant filed the instant unopposed petition to confirm arbitration award.

ANALYSIS:

A. Legal Standard

Any party to an arbitration in which an award has been made may petition the court to confirm, correct, or vacate the award. (Cal. Code of Civ. Proc. §1285.) When a petition to confirm an award is filed, the superior court has four courses of conduct available: to confirm the award, to correct and confirm it, to vacate it, or to dismiss the petition. (Cooper v. Lavely & Singer Professional Corp. (2014) 230 Cal.App.4th 1, 10.) Arbitration awards are subject to very limited judicial review, and the merits of the controversy are not reviewable on a petition to confirm, vacate, or correct. (Cinel v. Christopher (2012) 203 Cal.App.4th 759, fn 5.) Thus, an arbitration award may only be vacated if (1) the award was procured by corruption, fraud or other undue means, (2) there was corruption in any of the arbitrators, (3) the rights of the party were substantially prejudiced by misconduct of a neutral arbitrator, (4) the arbitrators exceeded their powers, (5) the rights of the party were substantially prejudiced by the refusal of the arbitrators to postpone the hearing, or (6) the arbitrator making the award failed to disclose a ground for disqualification or failed to disqualify himself or herself as required upon receipt of timely demand. (Code of Civ. Proc., §1286.2.)

The procedural requirements of a petition to confirm an arbitration award require the petition to:

“(a) Set forth the substance of or have attached a copy of the agreement to arbitrate unless the petitioner denies the existence of such an agreement.

(b) Set forth the names of the arbitrators.

(c) Set forth or have attached a copy of the award and the written opinion of the arbitrators, if any.” (Code of Civ. Proc., §1285.4.)

B. Discussion

Defendant seeks to confirm the arbitration award that was rendered on December 10, 2019 by Hon. Patricia Collins (Ret.), an arbitrator with ADR Services, Inc. (Petition, ¶¶ 11-13.) Defendant has attached a copy of the award and written opinion of the arbitrator as Exhibit C. The arbitration proceeding determined whether Defendant defrauded Plaintiff by inducing him to leave Cedars and to join USC based on a false promise by the chair of the Department of Surgery at USC. (Petition, Ex. C, p. 2:4-3:3.) The arbitration award holds that “Plaintiff shall take nothing by his claim” and “judgment should be rendered in favor of defendant USC.” (Petition, Ex. C, p. 25:4-5; Petition, ¶ 13.) Defendant asserts that “the terms of the award require neither party to pay the other anything.” (Petition, ¶ 13.)

Plaintiff has not opposed this petition and thus has not given the Court any reason not to grant this petition.

The Court GRANTS Defendant’s petition to confirm the arbitration award.