Oshita v. Chazanas CA2/3
Defendant and appellant Ariel Chazanas (Ariel) appeals an order denying his petition to compel arbitration of claims asserted against him in a lawsuit filed by his grandmother, Mindlea Chazanas (Mindlea). The operative first amended complaint (FAC) included a cause of action against Ariel for breach of contract and sought an accounting.
Ariel contends the trial court erred in denying his petition to compel arbitration because two operating agreements relevant to this litigation contained arbitration provisions and he never waived his right to compel arbitration of Mindlea’s claims against him.
We conclude Ariel has failed to meet his appellate burden to show error. We therefore affirm the order denying the petition to compel arbitration.
Comments on Oshita v. Chazanas CA2/3