Gordon

Gordon v. G.R.O.U.P., Inc.

Bad Law
1996 Cal. App. LEXIS 919·49 Cal. App. 4th 998·56 Cal. Rptr. 2d 914·96 Daily Journal DAR 11916·96 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 7294
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 27, 1996A069452California4,794 words

Opinion

Opinion

Phelan, J.

Respondents Anthony Gordon, Dan Jackson, George King, James Rudisill, Lonnie Williams, and Taruk Ben-Ali (respondents), filed suit against Melvin Johnson (Johnson), G.R.O.U.P., Inc. (GROUP), and Herman Sally, Jr. (Sally), for personal injuries sustained in a motor vehicle accident. In this appeal, GROUP and its uninsured motorist carrier, Paratransit Insurance Corporation (hereinafter, collectively, appellants), seek review of an order and judgment confirming an arbitrator’s award of damages, plus statutory and arbitration costs, in favor of respondents. GROUP and Paratransit contend that the trial court erred by denying GROUP’S request for a trial de novo after a “combined” arbitration of respondents’ claims pursuant to statutes which require, respectively, judicial arbitration for claims under $50,000 (Code Civ. Proc., § 1141.10 et seq.), and contractual arbitration for claims under the uninsured motorist provisions of GROUP’S insurance policy (Ins. Code, § 11580.2).

We conclude that the trial court acted within its authority and discretion when it ordered the parties to proceed simultaneously with the judicial arbitration and the uninsured motorist arbitration before…

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.