This Is The Third In A Recent Trio Of Cases To So Hold. In our November 25, 2022 post, we discussed DeLeon and Espinoza, two appellate cases holding that a business failing to timely pay its share of arbitration fees under a consumer contract eschews its right to arbitrate and can be forced to […]
Arbitration Tribunal’s Fee Award Was Not Completely Irrational In Nature Under The FAA. In HayDay Farms, Inc. v. FeeDx Holdings, Inc., Case Nos. 21-55650/21-55698 (9th Cir. Dec. 19, 2022) (published), two parties (HayDay and FeeDx) entered into an exclusive distribution agreement with each other through Nippon, providing for arbitration and making Nippon liable for
Issue Was Failure To Pay Fees/Costs For An Arbitration Continuance, But Arbitration Initiation Case Reasoning Was Analogous. DeLeon v. Juanita’s Foods, Case No. B315394 (2d Dist., Div. 3 Nov. 23, 2022) (published) is the next progression from Espinoza v. Superior Court, 83 Cal.App.5th 761, 775-776 (2022), which held that an employer’s failure to timely
This Was No Ground To Correct The Award. In Hollander v. Tennenbaum Capital Partners, LLC, Case No. B314018 (2d Dist., Div. 1 Nov. 21, 2022) (unpublished), the appellate court rejected an arbitration claimant’s argument that Labor Code fees were unwaivable when the claimant did not articulate that ground as a basis for the fee
Revised Award Was Not A Mere Correction, But A Substantive Merits Reconsideration And Impermissible New Award. Taska v. TheRealReal, Inc., Case No. A164130 (1st Dist., Div. 5 Nov. 4, 2022) (published) was a situation where an arbitrator found in employer’s favor on the merits and denied employer’s fee request after finding employee’s case was
Order Compelling Arbitration Was Vacated And $2,310 In Monetary Sanctions Against Company Affirmed On Appeal. The California Legislature recently enacted Code of Civil Procedure sections 1281.97, 1281.98, and 1281.99 which obligate a company which drafts an arbitration agreement relating to an employee or a consumer to pay its share of arbitration fees no later
Subsequent Post-Trial Proceeding Costs Not Subsumed In Contractual Clause. In Crowder v. Freeman, Freeman & Smiley LLP, Case No. B309001 (2d Dist., Div. 1 Mar. 22, 2022) (unpublished), an appellate court reversed a superior court fee denial relating to arbitration proceedings, where only the arbitrator was allowed to award fees and costs. The appellate
Arbitrator’s Ruling That Seller Did Not Unreasonably Refuse Mediation Was Upheld. Unless an arbitration agreement has language indicating that the arbitrator’s award is subject to review under a heightened standard for legal error, it will be close to impossible to reverse an arbitrator’s legal, much less factual, determinations. Faro v. Garnero, Case No. C093870
Lots Of Arguments Raised, But Merits Had To Be Decided To Determine Who Prevailed. What occurred in Harris v. University Village Thousand Oaks CCRC LLC, Case No. B311972 (2d Dist., Div. 6 Mar. 21, 2022) (unpublished) is that a lower court’s confirmation of an arbitration award was reversed because the appellate court determined that
Even If The Ruling Was Erroneous, The Fee Ruling Could Not Be Reviewed On The Merits. Arbitration can be a tough process, because the arbitrator’s rulings—even on attorney’s fees and costs—are seldom ones which can be reviewed on the merits. Sirott v. East Bay Medical Oncology, Case Nos. A161353/A161555 (1st Dist., Div. 2 Jan.
