Templeton Development Corp. v. Superior Court

Good Law
144 Cal. App. 4th 1073·2006 Cal. App. LEXIS 1798·2006 Daily Journal DAR 15105·51 Cal. Rptr. 3d 19·2006 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 10590
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaOctober 25, 2006C052528California3,946 words

Opinion

Opinion

Cantil-Sakauye, J.

On January 23, 2006, real party in interest Dick Emard Electric, Inc. (Emard), an electrical contractor, sued petitioner Templeton Development Corporation (Templeton), a general building contractor based in Nevada, for breach of contract, common counts, violation of Civil Code section 3260, and violation of Business and Professions Code section 7108.5. Also included in the complaint were causes of action against petitioners Carefree Natomas Limited Partnership; Carefree Natomas, LP; and CALGP Corporation on a stop notice and to foreclose on a mechanic’s lien. Emard’s claims involve materials, labor and equipment supplied for construction of an apartment complex known as Carefree Natomas in Sacramento.

Petitioners unsuccessfully moved to dismiss Emard’s complaint on the ground of inconvenient forum. They argued the subcontract agreement between Emard and Templeton required Emard to submit the dispute to mediation or arbitration in Las Vegas, Nevada, before filing suit. The court ruled that Code of Civil Procedure section 410.42 (section 410.42) rendered the out-of-state mediation provision unenforceable.

Petitioners filed a petition for writ of mandate asking this court…

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.