Betz

Betz v. Pankow

Bad Law
16 Cal. App. 4th 919·1993 Cal. App. LEXIS 645·20 Cal. Rptr. 2d 834·93 Daily Journal DAR 7761·93 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 4595
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 18, 1993A052194California3,889 words

Opinion

Opinion

Haning, J.

Appellant Heide V. Betz appeals the denial of her petition to vacate an arbitration award in favor of respondent Charles J. Pankow. She contends the award by two male members of a three-person arbitration panel was improperly influenced by gender bias against her and in favor of respondent. We conclude the record supports the trial court’s conclusion that appellant has not sustained her contention, and affirm.

Facts and Procedural History

Appellant and respondent were the sole members of a partnership organized for the purpose of “ownership and operation of property.” Their written partnership agreement provided that upon termination of the partnership, either partner could purchase the interest of the other at a price equal to the selling partner’s “original contribution to the partnership.” It farther provided that any dispute arising thereunder would be resolved by arbitration under the auspices of the American Arbitration Association (AAA).

When the parties decided to dissolve the partnership but were unable to agree on the manner of dissolution, the dispute was submitted to a panel of three arbitrators selected by the AAA, consisting of two males and one female.…

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.