Augusta

Augusta v. Keehn & Associates

Good Law
123 Cal. Rptr. 3d 595·193 Cal. App. 4th 331·2011 Cal. App. LEXIS 255
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 4, 2011No. D056262California3,764 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

McConnell, J.

Mark Augusta appeals an order denying his petition to compel arbitration of his legal malpractice action against Keehn & Associates and L. Scott Keehn (together Keehn). Augusta contends the trial court erred by finding he waived his right to arbitrate by unreasonably delaying in seeking arbitration, and by taking steps inconsistent with an intent *334 to invoke arbitration, e.g., obtaining discovery from Keehn through court processes, which caused prejudice to him. We affirm the order as supported by substantial evidence.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

On December 19, 2008, Augusta filed a complaint against Keehn for legal malpractice. The parties’ contract included a clause for binding arbitration, but Augusta did not invoke it.

In February 2009 Augusta filed a first amended complaint (FAC), which added counts for fraud and breach of fiduciary duty based on the same conduct as the negligence claim. The FAC alleges as follows. Keehn represented Augusta, a licensed securities salesman, between 2002 and 2008 in a bankruptcy proceeding that arose from substantial awards clients obtained against him in securities litigation over certain bonds that defaulted. The bonds,…

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.