Health and Wellness Lifestyle Club v. Grove Point Investments CA4/3

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 10, 2025G064375California1,560 words

Opinion

Opinion

Scott, J.

FACTS

Plaintiff sued Valentine in Ohio over a failed transaction for the purchase of golf courses.3 A jury found for Valentine. Plaintiff then filed an arbitration claim against Valentine and Grove Point based on the same transaction. The arbitration took place in San Diego and the arbitration

1 Undesignated statutory references are to this code.

2 Because plaintiff did not appeal the trial court’s denial of its

motion under section 473, subdivision (b), we lack jurisdiction to review that ruling. (Burnete v. La Casa Dana Apartments (2007) 148 Cal.App.4th 1262, 1265–1266 [denial of § 473 motion separately appealable]; Sole Energy Co. v. Petrominerals Corp. (2005) 128 Cal.App.4th 212, 239 [appeal from judgment does not encompass separately appealable order].)

3 Valentine allegedly brokered the deal. Grove Point was

Valentine’s broker-dealer.

2 panel served its award in July 2023, finding for defendants based on res judicata.4 It’s undisputed that, unless tolled, the statutory deadline for plaintiff to file and serve a petition to vacate the award was November 3, 2023. (See § 1288.) One day before the deadline, plaintiff filed nearly identical petitions to vacate the award in…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.