legal news


Register | Forgot Password

Hyatt v. Stern CA4/1
Defendant and appellant Paule Stern appeals a postjudgment order denying her motion to set aside an order and judgment confirming an arbitration award. The award was issued in a bar association fee arbitration program, in favor of plaintiff and respondent Richard V. Hyatt. Stern contends the trial court abused its discretion in denying her motion to set aside or quash the order confirming the arbitration award, on the grounds that her underlying petition to vacate the award should have been deemed timely, due to alleged defects in service of the award. [award can be vacated due to arbitrator misconduct or excess of powers, etc.].) Alternatively, she claims that if her earlier petition to vacate was not timely filed, it was delayed as a result of her excusable neglect and she sufficiently requested the court to allow her a hearing on it. We find no abuse of discretion or legal error in the trial court's evaluation of her claims and affirm the postjudgment order.

Search thread for
Download thread as



Quick Reply

Your Name:
Your Comment:

smiling face wink grin cool nod sticking out tongue raised eyebrow confused shocked shaking head disapproval rolling eyes sad mad

Click an emoji to insert it into your message. You may use BB Codes in your message.
Spam Prevention:

    Home | About Us | Privacy | Subscribe
    © 2025 Fearnotlaw.com The california lawyer directory

  Copyright © 2025 Result Oriented Marketing, Inc.

attorney
scale