Outdoor Services, Inc. v. Pabagold, Inc.

Good Law
185 Cal. App. 3d 676·1986 Cal. App. LEXIS 2030·230 Cal. Rptr. 73
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 18, 1986A021667California3,331 words

Opinion

Opinion

Barry-Deal, J.

Pabagold, Inc. (Pabagold), appeals from an order confirming an arbitration award and judgment in favor of Outdoor Services, Inc. (Outdoor Services). Pabagold argues that Outdoor Services was not a third party beneficiary of the contract between Pabagold and Mediasmith, an advertising agency, and therefore could not enforce the arbitration agreement contained in the contract. Pabagold also asserts that even if Outdoor Services was a third party beneficiary, it waived its rights under the arbitration agreement by filing a cross-complaint against Pabagold in an action brought by Gannett Outdoor Co., Inc., of Southern California (Gannett) against Outdoor Services. Finally, Pabagold argues that it was wrongfully denied a continuance of the arbitration hearing because its counsel withdrew six days before the hearing. We affirm the judgment.

Background

In March 1981, Pabagold entered into a written contract with Mediasmith, by which Mediasmith agreed to plan and place an advertising campaign for Pabagold’s product, Hawaiian Gold Pabatan suntan lotion. The contract authorized Mediasmith to enter into contracts with third parties in order to effectuate the advertising program…

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.