M & M Foods, Inc. v. Pacific American Fish Co.

Good Law
126 Cal. Rptr. 3d 310·196 Cal. App. 4th 554·2011 Cal. App. LEXIS 718
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 10, 2011No. B220441California3,566 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Mosk, J.

*557 Opinion

INTRODUCTION

M&M Foods, Inc. (M&M), filed a complaint against Pacific American Fish Co., Inc., Paul Huh, and Peter Huh 1 and then petitioned the trial court to compel arbitration based on an arbitration clause in an asset purchase agreement between the parties. Pacific opposed the petition, arguing, inter alia, that M&M lacked standing to enforce the arbitration provision because the right to do so belonged exclusively to the trustee of M&M’s former bankruptcy estate. The trial court denied the petition on that ground, as well as on others. On appeal, M&M argues, inter alia, that because the bankruptcy trustee abandoned the claims asserted in M&M’s complaint, those claims reverted to M&M, along with the right to arbitrate them pursuant to the arbitration clause in the asset purchase agreement.

We hold that because M&M failed in the bankruptcy proceeding to schedule the claims asserted in the complaint, those claims had not been abandoned, and only the trustee had the right to compel arbitration of those claims. Accordingly, we affirm the order of the trial court denying the petition to compel arbitration.

FACTUAL 2 AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

A. The Arbitration…

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.