Koll Hancock Torrey Pines v. Biophysica Foundation, Inc.

Good Law
1989 Cal. App. LEXIS 1145·215 Cal. App. 3d 883·264 Cal. Rptr. 36
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 15, 1989D007708California1,770 words

Opinion

Opinion

Froehlich, J.

Biophysica Foundation, Inc. (Biophysica), defendant and cross-complainant below, appeals from the judgment entered in favor of Roll Hancock Torrey Pines on Roll’s complaint, and from the judgment entered in favor of cross-defendants Roll and The Hartford Group on Biophysica’s cross-complaint, and from various related orders. Many issues are raised on appeal, the resolution of which requires a detailed recitation of the background facts and proceedings. We have concluded, however, that one contention rises well above the others in terms of its juridical significance. We therefore deal with this issue first, deferring to the second portion of our opinion the facts, law and discussion relevant to the several other contentions raised by the appellant. The issue to which we give paramount consideration is the effect of an arbitrator’s failure to render a decision within 10 days after the conclusion of the hearing, as required by California Rules of Court, rule 1615(b).

I

Late Filing of Arbitrator’s Decision

At one point in the pretrial proceedings judicial arbitration was ordered under Code of Civil Procedure section 1141.10 et seq. and in accordance with California Rules…

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.