Corona v. Amherst Partners

Bad Law
107 Cal. App. 4th 701·132 Cal. Rptr. 2d 250·2003 Cal. App. LEXIS 483·2003 Daily Journal DAR 3629·2003 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 2853
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 1, 2003No. D040084California1,710 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

McIntyre, J.

The issue presented in this case is one of first impression in California: where a party is required by contract to submit a dispute to binding arbitration, but does not request that the arbitrator decide his entitlement to attorney fees even though that issue was part of the submission, may *704 a trial court nonetheless determine that issue and make an award of fees and costs incurred in the arbitration? We answer this question in the negative and affirm the trial court’s denial of the plaintiff’s request for an award of such fees and costs.

Factual and Procedural Background

Juvenal Corona entered into a standard real estate purchase contract to buy a residence at 6858 Amherst Street from Amherst Partners (Amherst) for $115,000. While the sale was in escrow, Amherst sold the property to a third party for $125,000. Corona brought this action against Amherst and one of its principals, Roger Bill (collectively with Amherst, the defendants), and demanded that the matter be submitted to binding arbitration in accordance with the purchase contract. In October 2000, the parties signed a stipulation to submit the matter to binding arbitration. In the arbitration proceedings,…

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.