This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 11/27/2021 at 16:46:24 (UTC).

SITRICK GROUP, LLC VS VIVERA PHARMACEUTICALS, LLC

Case Summary

On 07/06/2021 SITRICK GROUP, LLC filed an Other - Arbitration lawsuit against VIVERA PHARMACEUTICALS, LLC. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Stanley Mosk Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judges overseeing this case are BARBARA M. SCHEPER and BARBARA A. MEIERS. The case status is Other.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    *******2156

  • Filing Date:

    07/06/2021

  • Case Status:

    Other

  • Case Type:

    Other - Arbitration

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

Presiding Judges

BARBARA M. SCHEPER

BARBARA A. MEIERS

 

Party Details

Petitioner

SITRICK GROUP LLC

Respondent

VIVERA PHARMACEUTICALS LLC

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Petitioner Attorneys

NEMECEK FRANK WYNN

NEMECEK FRANK ESQ.

Respondent Attorney

TSENG SHANE W.

 

Court Documents

Reply - REPLY PETITIONER SITRICK GROUP, LLC'S REPLY TO RESPONDENT VIVERA PHARMACEUTICALS, LLC'S OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO CONFIRM FINAL ARBITRATION AWARD, ETC.

11/3/2021: Reply - REPLY PETITIONER SITRICK GROUP, LLC'S REPLY TO RESPONDENT VIVERA PHARMACEUTICALS, LLC'S OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO CONFIRM FINAL ARBITRATION AWARD, ETC.

Judgment - JUDGMENT [PROPOSED]

11/10/2021: Judgment - JUDGMENT [PROPOSED]

Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (HEARING ON MOTION - OTHER NOTICE OF HEARING ON PETITION AND M...)

11/10/2021: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (HEARING ON MOTION - OTHER NOTICE OF HEARING ON PETITION AND M...)

Notice of Ruling

11/12/2021: Notice of Ruling

Notice of Entry of Judgment

11/15/2021: Notice of Entry of Judgment

Notice of Ruling - NOTICE OF RULING NOTICE OF (I) RULING GRANTING PETITIONER SITRICK GROI"JP, LLC'S EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR OF HEARING ON CONTINUANCE MOTION TO CONFIRM FINAL ARBITRATION AWARD AND FOR

9/20/2021: Notice of Ruling - NOTICE OF RULING NOTICE OF (I) RULING GRANTING PETITIONER SITRICK GROI"JP, LLC'S EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR OF HEARING ON CONTINUANCE MOTION TO CONFIRM FINAL ARBITRATION AWARD AND FOR

Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (HEARING ON EX PARTE APPLICATION TO CONTINUE MOTION TO CONFIRM...)

9/20/2021: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (HEARING ON EX PARTE APPLICATION TO CONTINUE MOTION TO CONFIRM...)

Ex Parte Application - EX PARTE APPLICATION PETITIONER SITRICK GROUP, LLC'S UNOPPOSED EX PARTE APPLICATION TO CONTINUE MOTION TO CONFIRM ARB., ETC.

9/17/2021: Ex Parte Application - EX PARTE APPLICATION PETITIONER SITRICK GROUP, LLC'S UNOPPOSED EX PARTE APPLICATION TO CONTINUE MOTION TO CONFIRM ARB., ETC.

Declaration - DECLARATION DECLARATION OF PAUL EDALAT IN SUPPORT OF OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO CONFIRM ARBITRATION AWARD

9/8/2021: Declaration - DECLARATION DECLARATION OF PAUL EDALAT IN SUPPORT OF OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO CONFIRM ARBITRATION AWARD

Opposition - OPPOSITION RESPONDENT VIVERA PHARMACEUTICALS, LLCS OPPOSITION TO PETITIONERS MOTION TO CONFIRM FINAL ARBITRATION AWARD

9/8/2021: Opposition - OPPOSITION RESPONDENT VIVERA PHARMACEUTICALS, LLCS OPPOSITION TO PETITIONERS MOTION TO CONFIRM FINAL ARBITRATION AWARD

Declaration - DECLARATION DECLARATION OF SHANE W. TSENG IN SUPPORT OF OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO CONFIRM ARBITRATION AWARD

9/8/2021: Declaration - DECLARATION DECLARATION OF SHANE W. TSENG IN SUPPORT OF OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO CONFIRM ARBITRATION AWARD

Notice - NOTICE OF CONTINUANCE OF HEARING ON MOTION TO CONFIRM ARBITRATION AWARD

8/26/2021: Notice - NOTICE OF CONTINUANCE OF HEARING ON MOTION TO CONFIRM ARBITRATION AWARD

Notice Re: Continuance of Hearing and Order

8/20/2021: Notice Re: Continuance of Hearing and Order

Motion re: - MOTION RE: NOTICE OF MOTION TO CONFIRM ARBITRATION AWARD, ETC.

8/10/2021: Motion re: - MOTION RE: NOTICE OF MOTION TO CONFIRM ARBITRATION AWARD, ETC.

Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (COURT ORDER RE RETRIEVAL OF DOCUMENT:)

8/11/2021: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (COURT ORDER RE RETRIEVAL OF DOCUMENT:)

Notice - NOTICE OF CASE REASSIGNMENT AND NOTICE OF CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

7/30/2021: Notice - NOTICE OF CASE REASSIGNMENT AND NOTICE OF CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

Certificate of Mailing for - CERTIFICATE OF MAILING FOR (HEARING ON EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR AN ORDER (1) THAT CERTAIN...) OF 07/27/2021

7/27/2021: Certificate of Mailing for - CERTIFICATE OF MAILING FOR (HEARING ON EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR AN ORDER (1) THAT CERTAIN...) OF 07/27/2021

Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (HEARING ON EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR AN ORDER (1) THAT CERTAIN...)

7/27/2021: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (HEARING ON EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR AN ORDER (1) THAT CERTAIN...)

26 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 11/15/2021
  • DocketNotice of Entry of Judgment (or Order); Filed by Sitrick Group, LLC (Petitioner)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/12/2021
  • DocketNotice of Ruling; Filed by Sitrick Group, LLC (Petitioner)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/10/2021
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department 30, Barbara M. Scheper, Presiding; Hearing on Motion - Other (Notice of Hearing on Petition and Motion to Confirm Arbitration Award) - Held

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/10/2021
  • DocketMinute Order ( (Hearing on Motion - Other Notice of Hearing on Petition and M...)); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/10/2021
  • DocketJudgment ((Arbitration Award)); Filed by Sitrick Group, LLC (Petitioner)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/03/2021
  • DocketReply (Petitioner Sitrick Group, LLC's Reply to Respondent Vivera Pharmaceuticals, LLC's Opposition to Motion to Confirm Final Arbitration Award, etc.); Filed by Sitrick Group, LLC (Petitioner)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/21/2021
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department 30, Barbara M. Scheper, Presiding; Hearing on Motion - Other (Notice of Hearing on Petition and Motion to Confirm Arbitration Award) - Not Held - Rescheduled by Party

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/20/2021
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department 30, Barbara M. Scheper, Presiding; Hearing on Ex Parte Application (to Continue Motion to Confirm Arb., etc.) - Held

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/20/2021
  • DocketNotice of Ruling (NOTICE OF (I) RULING GRANTING PETITIONER SITRICK GROI"JP, LLC'S EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR OF HEARING ON CONTINUANCE MOTION TO CONFIRM FINAL ARBITRATION AWARD AND FOR LEAVE TO FILE A REPLY); Filed by Sitrick Group, LLC (Petitioner)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/20/2021
  • DocketMinute Order ( (Hearing on Ex Parte Application to Continue Motion to Confirm...)); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
26 More Docket Entries
  • 07/16/2021
  • Docketat 2:30 PM in Department 12, Barbara A. Meiers, Presiding; Court Order

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/16/2021
  • DocketNotice of Case Reassignment/Vacate Hearings; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/16/2021
  • DocketMinute Order ( (Court Order Re: Peremptory Challenge to Judicial Officer)); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/16/2021
  • DocketCertificate of Mailing for ((Court Order Re: Peremptory Challenge to Judicial Officer) of 07/16/2021); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/07/2021
  • DocketChallenge To Judicial Officer - Peremptory (170.6); Filed by Sitrick Group, LLC (Petitioner)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/06/2021
  • DocketNotice of Case Assignment - Unlimited Civil Case; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/06/2021
  • DocketCivil Case Cover Sheet; Filed by Sitrick Group, LLC (Petitioner)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/06/2021
  • DocketSummons (on Petition); Filed by Sitrick Group, LLC (Petitioner)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/06/2021
  • DocketPetition to Confirm Arbitration Award; Filed by Sitrick Group, LLC (Petitioner)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/06/2021
  • DocketCivil Case Cover Sheet; Filed by Sitrick Group, LLC (Petitioner)

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

b"

Case Number: 21STCP02156 Hearing Date: November 10, 2021 Dept: 30

Dept. 30

\r\n\r\n

Calendar No.

\r\n\r\n

Sitrick Group,\r\nLLC vs. Vivera Pharmaceuticals, LLC, et. al., Case No. 21STCP02156

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Tentative Ruling\r\nre: Petitioner’s Petition to Confirm\r\nArbitration Award

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Petitioner\r\nSitrick Group, LLC (Petitioner) moves to confirm the arbitration award of\r\n$556,639.98 entered in its favor against Respondent Vivera Pharmaceuticals, LLC\r\n(Respondent) on June 22, 2021, and requests attorneys’ fees in the amount of\r\n$17,424.60.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Respondent\r\nrequests that the arbitration award be vacated on the grounds that the\r\nappointed arbitrator, Judge Swart, took on a separate matter involving\r\nPetitioner and Petitioner’s counsel during the pendency of the arbitration, and\r\nprovided late and inadequate disclosure of that matter to Respondent.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

The\r\npetition to confirm is granted.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

“The Code\r\nof Civil Procedure and the Ethics Standards impose various disclosure\r\nobligations on neutral arbitrators. Section 1281.9, subdivision (a), provides\r\n‘the arbitrator must disclose ‘any ground specified in Section 170.1 for disqualification\r\nof a judge,’ as well as ‘matters required to be disclosed by the ethics\r\nstandards for neutral arbitrators adopted by the Judicial Council ....’\r\nSignificantly, ‘an arbitrator’s duty of disclosure is a continuing one.’” (Honeycutt\r\nv. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. (2018) 25 Cal.App.5th 909, 922 (internal\r\ncitations omitted).) “Judicial review of private arbitration awards is\r\ngenerally limited to the statutory grounds for vacating or correcting an award.\r\nOne of those statutory grounds is section 1286.2, subdivision (a)(6)(A), which\r\nprovides that, if the arbitrator fails ‘to disclose within the time required\r\nfor disclosure a ground for disqualification of which the arbitrator was then\r\naware,’ the court ‘shall vacate the award.’” (Id. at 924.)

\r\n\r\n

However,\r\n“[t]he continuing duty to disclose service in another pending case involving\r\nthe parties or their lawyers (standard 7(d)(4)(a)(i)) is obviated if the\r\narbitrator has made the disclosure of his intent to entertain such offers as\r\nrequired by standard 12(b).” (Ovitz v. Schulman (2005) 133 Cal.App.4th 830, 840.)

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Standard\r\n7(b)(2) provides, “If an arbitrator has disclosed to the parties in an\r\narbitration that he or she will entertain offers of employment or of\r\nprofessional relationships from a party or lawyer for a party while the\r\narbitration is pending as required by subdivision (b) of standard 12, the\r\narbitrator is not required to disclose to the parties in that arbitration any\r\nsuch offer from a party or lawyer for a party that he or she subsequently\r\nreceives or accepts while that arbitration is pending.”

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Standard 12(b) in its current state\r\nwas written in order to clarify that “arbitrators [must] make a disclosure only\r\nif they will entertain offers of employment while the arbitration is pending[ ]\r\n[and that] no disclosure would be required if the arbitrator would not\r\nentertain such offers.” (Ovitz, 133 Cal.App.4th at 840 [quoting Report\r\nto Judicial Counsel from General Counsel Michael Bergeisen dated Dec. 3, 2002,\r\nre Ethics Standards for Neutral Arbitrators in Contractual Arbitration].)

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

The Court\r\nof Appeal in Ovitz summarized the relevant\r\nstandards as follows:

\r\n\r\n

(1) \r\nif, while the current\r\narbitration is pending, the arbitrator intends to entertain other offers of\r\nemployment from the parties or their lawyers, the arbitrator must disclose that\r\nintention in writing within 10 calendar days of service of notice of the\r\narbitrator's proposed nomination or appointment (standard 12(b)); (2) assuming\r\nthis disclosure is made (and the arbitrator is not disqualified by a party),\r\nthe arbitrator may accept such offers without the need for any further\r\ndisclosure (standard 7(b)(2)); (3) assuming, however, that the arbitrator does not\r\ndisclose an intent to entertain additional offers from the parties or their\r\nlawyers, the arbitrator cannot accept any such offer until the current\r\narbitration is concluded (standard 12(c)); and (4) if, despite this\r\nprohibition, the arbitrator accepts such an offer, the arbitrator must disclose\r\nthat fact to the parties in the current arbitration in writing (standard\r\n7(d)(4)(A)(i)) within 10 calendar days (standard 7(c)).

\r\n\r\n

(Id. at\r\n841-42.)

\r\n\r\n

Judge Swart\r\nwas appointed as arbitrator to this proceeding on August 20, 2020. (Tseng Decl.\r\nEx. 4.) On August 25, 2021, he timely disclosed to the parties that he intended\r\nto entertain other offers of employment from the parties or their lawyers, and\r\nthat he would not inform the parties if he did subsequently receive an offer\r\nwhile the arbitration was pending. (Tseng Decl. Ex. 5 [p 54]; see Standard\r\n12(b).) Respondent declined to disqualify Judge Swart on that basis within the\r\ntime permitted under Code Civ. Proc. § 1281.91(b). (Standard 12(b)(3).)

\r\n\r\n

Consequently,\r\nas stated in the disclosures, Judge Swart was under no obligation to inform\r\nRespondent that he accepted the new matter involving Petitioner and\r\nPetitioner’s counsel. (Standard 7(b)(2).) There thus existed no grounds for\r\ndisqualification that would justify vacating the arbitration award.

\r\n\r\n

Respondent acknowledges\r\nthe disclosure under section 12, but argues that it was prejudiced regardless\r\nbecause the arbitrator did in fact disclose the new matter close to the date\r\nset for arbitration, contrary to the provision that such matters would not be\r\ndisclosed. The Court disagrees that this is sufficient grounds for vacating the\r\naward. Respondent does not explain how it was prejudiced by receiving notice\r\nthat the arbitrator was under no obligation to provide, and Respondent has\r\nprovided no authorities in support.

\r\n\r\n

Therefore, the\r\npetition to confirm the arbitration award is granted. The arbitration agreement\r\nprovides that sums not paid to Petitioner pursuant to the agreement within\r\nthirty days of invoice shall bear interest at the rate of 10% per annum. (Nemecek Decl. ¶ 2, Ex. 1, ¶\r\n10.) The award shall therefore include such interest beginning from June 22,\r\n2021.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Petitioners seek post-award attorney\r\nfees in the amount of $17,424.60.

\r\n\r\n

“[A]s a general rule, attorney fees\r\nare not recoverable as costs unless they are authorized by statute or\r\nagreement.” (People ex rel. Dept. of\r\nCorporations v. Speedee Oil Change Systems, Inc. (2007) 147 Cal.App.4th\r\n424, 429.)

\r\n\r\n

The\r\nattorney bears the burden of proof as to “reasonableness” of any fee claim.\r\n(Code Civ. Proc., § 1033.5(c)(5).) This burden requires competent evidence as\r\nto the nature and value of the services rendered. (Martino v. Denevi (1986) 182 Cal.App.3d 553, 559.) “Testimony of an\r\nattorney as to the number of hours worked on a particular case is sufficient\r\nevidence to support an award of attorney fees, even in the absence of detailed\r\ntime records.” (Ibid.)

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Here, the\r\narbitration agreement attached to the petition clearly states that the\r\nprevailing party will recover reasonable attorney fees and costs. (Nemecek Decl.\r\n¶ 2, Ex. 1, ¶ 10.) Petitioner, as the prevailing party, is therefore entitled\r\nto attorney fees and costs.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Counsel for Petitioner, Frank W. Nemecek, provides a declaration in\r\nsupport of the requested fees. He has spent 21.4 hours on this matter post-award,\r\nand requests a rate of $649 per hour, for a total of $13,888.60. (Nemecek Decl.\r\n¶ 6.) Attorney Jonathan M. Starre has performed 6.8 hours of work on this\r\nmatter, for which counsel requests a rate of $520 per hour, totaling $3,536.00.\r\n(Id. at ¶ 5-6.) The sum of the requested fees is $17,424.60. The\r\nCourt finds that the requested fees are reasonable and supported by counsel’s\r\ndeclaration.

"
related-case-search

Dig Deeper

Get Deeper Insights on Court Cases


Latest cases where SITRICK GROUP LLC is a litigant

Latest cases where VIVERA PHARMACEUTICALS INC. A CORPORATION DBA SENTAR PHARMACEUTICALS is a litigant

Latest cases represented by Lawyer TSENG SHANE WAYNE