City of Vista v. Sutro & Co.

Good Law
1997 Cal. App. LEXIS 59·52 Cal. App. 4th 401·60 Cal. Rptr. 2d 488·97 Daily Journal DAR 1098·97 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 741
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 10, 1997D025845California3,800 words

Opinion

Opinion

Kremer, J.

Defendants Sutro & Co., Michael Axelrod, Gabriel Wisdom, Kevin Hoyle (together Sutro), and Prudential Securities, Inc., appeal an order denying their petitions to compel plaintiff City of Vista to arbitrate its claims against defendants and stay trial court proceedings pending arbitration. We reverse the order.

I

Introduction

This case involves the attempt by two investment brokerage firms to compel Vista to arbitrate its claims against them under client agreements executed on the city’s behalf by its finance director Frank Rowlen. Opposing the defense petitions to compel arbitration, Vista claimed Rowlen lacked authority to sign any agreement requiring the city to arbitrate disputes against the brokerage firms. Agreeing with Vista, the superior court denied the motions to compel arbitration. We conclude the court erred in finding Rowlen lacked authority to enter into arbitration agreements on Vista’s behalf.

II

Facts

For purposes of determining the propriety of the order denying defendants’ petitions to compel arbitration, we state the facts in the light most favorable to Vista. (Engineers & Architects Assn. v. Community Development Dept. (1994) 30 Cal.App.4th 644,…

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.