Reisman

Reisman v. Shahverdian

Good Law
153 Cal. App. 3d 1074·1984 Cal. App. LEXIS 1851·201 Cal. Rptr. 194
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 30, 1984Civ. 63633California6,946 words

Opinion

Opinion

Schauer, J.

Defendants appeal from a judgment confirming an arbitration award of attorney’s fees and also appeal from subsequent orders denying a motion to vacate the judgment and disallowing a Code of Civil Procedure section 170.6 disqualification of the superior court commissioner who rendered the rulings. Inasmuch as defendants had not stipulated to the commissioner’s acting as a temporary judge under the California Constitution, a principal issue is whether the defendants were “parties litigant.” We resolve this issue against the defendants and affirm the judgment. We find, however, that the commissioner was not empowered to hear the subsequent motion to vacate the judgment made pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure, section 473. We therefore remand the case so that this motion may be heard by a duly empowered judicial officer.

Factual and Procedural History

Plaintiff is an attorney who provided legal services for defendants. The bulk of the legal services were rendered for defendant Polin Zarekeivan Shahverdian in connection with the dissolution of her 11-month marriage. The other two defendants, her father and brother, had joined with her in a written fee agreement calling for…

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.