Schlessinger

Schlessinger v. Rosenfelds, Meyer & Susman

Good Law
1995 Cal. App. LEXIS 1178·40 Cal. App. 4th 1096·47 Cal. Rptr. 2d 650·95 Daily Journal DAR 16112·95 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 9277
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 5, 1995Docket Nos. B089703, B09234California5,509 words

Opinion

Opinion

Masterson, J.

Gary Schlessinger, an attorney, and Rosenfeld, Meyer & Susman (RM&S), his former law firm, could not agree on the payment due Schlessinger upon his resignation from the partnership. Pursuant to the partnership agreement, the dispute proceeded to arbitration before the American Arbitration Association. The arbitrator disposed of the principal issues by way of two motions for summary adjudication and ultimately rendered an award in favor of RM&S.

Schlessinger petitioned the superior court to vacate the arbitration award on the ground that the arbitrator had refused to hear evidence material to the controversy. In the petition, he asserted that the California Arbitration Act (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 1280-1294.2) precluded the use of summary adjudication motions in an arbitration proceeding. The trial court dismissed the petition. We conclude that the arbitrator could entertain such motions and affirm.

Background

Schlessinger was a partner at RM&S from January 1, 1966, through May 12, 1993, at which time he resigned from the partnership. In 1975, Schlessinger and other partners at RM&S had entered into a written partnership agreement (the agreement) governing their practice of…

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.