Cronus Investments, Inc. v. Concierge Services

Bad Law
2005 Cal. LEXIS 2644·2005 Daily Journal DAR 2945·25 Cal. Rptr. 3d 540·35 Cal. 4th 376·107 P.3d 217
Supreme Court of CaliforniaMarch 10, 2005S116288California6,834 words

Opinion

Opinion

Chin, J.

Code of Civil Procedure section 1281.2, subdivision (c) permits a trial court, under specified circumstances, to stay arbitration pending the outcome of related litigation. In Volt Info. Sciences v. Leland Stanford Jr. U. (1989) 489 U.S. 468 [ 103 L.Ed.2d 488 , 109 S.Ct. 1248 ] (Volt), the United States Supreme Court held that the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA), 9 United States Code section 1 et seq., which applies to and favors the enforcement of arbitration agreements affecting interstate commerce, does not preempt the application of section 1281.2, subdivision (c) where the parties have agreed that their arbitration agreement would be governed by the law of California. In this case, the parties agreed that their arbitration agreement would be governed by California law, but they further agreed that the designation of California law “shall not be deemed an election to preclude application of the [FAA], if it would be applicable.” As explained below, we conclude that, in this situation, the FAA also does not preempt the application of section 1281.2, subdivision (c).

Facts and Procedural History

In July 2000, Howard Colman transferred a home-management business, Dew-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.