Betz

Betz v. Pankow

Good Law
1995 Cal. App. LEXIS 81·31 Cal. App. 4th 1503·38 Cal. Rptr. 2d 107·95 Daily Journal DAR 1558·95 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 850
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 31, 1995Docket Nos. A064689, A065245California3,518 words

Opinion

Opinion

Haning, J.

harles J. Pankow appeals a judgment vacating an arbitration award. The issue before us is whether an arbitration award must be vacated because an arbitrator was formerly a partner in a law firm during a period when the firm represented a business entity in which one of the arbitrating parties had a financial and/or leadership interest, even though the arbitrator was not acquainted with the party and unaware of the party’s representation by his former law firm.

History

Pankow and respondent Heide V. Betz were the sole members of a partnership under an agreement providing that any dispute arising thereunder would be resolved by arbitration under the auspices of the American Arbitration Association (AAA). When the parties were unable to agree on the manner in which to dissolve their partnership their dispute was submitted to a panel of three arbitrators selected by the AAA, one of whom was Attorney David Sandborg. After approximately 42 days of hearing an award was rendered in favor of Pankow. Betz petitioned the trial court for vacation of the award on several grounds, including gender bias. The court denied her petition and entered judgment confirming the award on all…

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.