Gray

Gray v. Chiu

Good Law
151 Cal. Rptr. 3d 791·2013 Cal. App. LEXIS 40·212 Cal. App. 4th 1355
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 22, 2013No. B238304California3,377 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Perren, J.

The parties to a medical malpractice arbitration agree upon a neutral arbitrator. Subsequent to commencing arbitration proceedings but prior to the hearing, counsel for the defendant doctor affiliates with the firm providing the arbitrator. Neither counsel nor the arbitrator discloses that relationship. Here we conclude that the California Arbitration Act (the Act) (Code Civ. Proc., § 1280 et seq.), 1 and the California Rules of Court, Ethics Standards for Neutral Arbitrators in Contractual Arbitrations (Ethics Standards) require that the arbitrator disclose the relationship. The Act and the Ethics Standards (1) require a neutral arbitrator to disclose that a lawyer in the arbitration is a member of the administering “dispute resolution provider organization” (DRPO), and (2) section 1286.2, subdivision (a)(6) compels a trial court to vacate the arbitration award if the arbitrator fails to disclose that information.

*1359 In her appeal from the judgment affirming a medical malpractice arbitration award in favor of respondents, appellant Deborah Gray contends that the trial court erred by denying her petition to vacate the award on the ground that the arbitrator violated…

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.