Honeycutt

Honeycutt v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.

Good Law
236 Cal. Rptr. 3d 255·25 Cal. App. 5th 909
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 2, 2018B281982California951 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Segal, J.

*915 INTRODUCTION

The Code of Civil Procedure and the Ethics Standards for Neutral Arbitrators in Contractual Arbitration (Ethics Standards) require arbitrators in contractual arbitrations to make various disclosures about themselves, their experience, and their activity as private judges or, as they are sometimes called, "dispute resolution neutrals." Failure to make required disclosures may be a ground for disqualifying the arbitrator and, if the arbitrator was actually aware of the ground for disqualification, for vacating an award.

In this case, the arbitrator did not comply with several applicable disclosure requirements, which gave rise to multiple grounds for disqualification. Because the arbitrator was actually aware of at least one of the grounds for disqualification, the resulting arbitration award was subject to vacatur. Therefore, we reverse the trial court's order denying the petition to vacate the award and granting the petition to confirm it.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

A. Appointment and Disclosure

On November 6, 2013 Patrice Honeycutt filed this action against her former employer, JP Morgan Chase Bank, alleging causes of action for discrimination,…

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.