Roitz

Roitz v. Coldwell Banker Residential Brokerage Co.

Good Law
1998 Cal. App. LEXIS 249·62 Cal. App. 4th 716·73 Cal. Rptr. 2d 85·98 Daily Journal DAR 3048·98 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 2207
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 26, 1998B107631California3,069 words

Opinion

Opinion

Hastings, J.

Defendant Coldwell Banker Residential Brokerage Company (appellant) appeals a judgment entered after the trial court confirmed an arbitration award in favor of plaintiff Mary Roitz (respondent) and denied appellant’s motion to vacate the award. We conclude that the trial court did not err and affirm the judgment.

Facts

Respondent worked for appellant as an independent contractor. Their agreement provided that it “may be terminated by either party for any reason, at any time, and without cause. . . .” The agreement also provided for binding arbitration of disputes.

After being terminated by appellant in June 1995, respondent filed a complaint asserting 10 causes of action: breach of implied contract, breach of covenant of good faith and fair dealing, wrongful termination, sexual discrimination, slander, invasion of privacy, emotional distress (seventh and eighth causes of action), assault, and battery.

Appellant petitioned that the matter be ordered to arbitration, which was granted on November 22, 1995. Thereafter, the parties selected Peter S. Smith, a retired judge, as the arbitrator and estimated that arbitration would take two days to complete. In a letter dated…

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.