Mansouri

Fleur Du Lac Estates Ass'n v. Mansouri

Good Law
140 Cal. Rptr. 3d 536·2012 Cal. App. LEXIS 461·205 Cal. App. 4th 249·2012 WL 1388181
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 23, 2012No. C068693California3,545 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Robie, J.

After this court in an earlier writ proceeding directed the trial court to enter an order denying a petition to compel arbitration filed by plaintiff Fleur du Lac Estates Association (the Association) (see Mansouri v. Superior Court (2010) 181 Cal.App.4th 633, 643 [ 104 Cal.Rptr.3d 824 ]), defendant Zari Mansouri sought attorney fees and costs from the Association on the theory that she was the prevailing party in the proceeding to compel arbitration. The trial court concluded that Mansouri’s fee motion and costs memoranda were untimely. Mansouri moved for reconsideration and, in the alternative, for relief under Code of Civil Procedure 1 section 473, subdivision (b) (section 473(b)) based on excusable mistake. The trial court denied that motion, too.

On Mansouri’s appeal from the order denying her motions for reconsideration and for relief under section 473(b), we conclude the order is not appealable. 2 As Mansouri appears to recognize, the only way the order could *252 have been appealable would have been as an order after final judgment under subdivision (e) of section 1294 (part of the California Arbitration Act; § 1280 et seq.). But for that to be the case, the…

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.