Brown v. Freeman
This case arises out of a business deal gone bad between plaintiff Jerry Brown and various defendants, including his former attorney and business partners. In a brief and succinct order, the trial court granted defendants petition to compel arbitration of Browns claims and their motion to stay proceedings pending completion of that arbitration. Apparently doubting the court could have meant what it said, Brown filed an ex parte application for clarification of the courts ruling. Thereafter, the court issued a further order, in which the court denied the petition to compel arbitration and motion to stay with respect to some of Browns claims. The court found the remaining claims had already been adjudicated in another case. On appeal, defendants contend the trial court erred in granting Browns ex parte application for clarification because it was nothing more than a thinly disguised motion to reconsider that was not based on any new law or facts, as required by Code of Civil Procedure section 1008. Court agree. Accordingly, court reverse the trial courts further order granting Browns ex parte application and remand the case for further proceedings.
Comments on Brown v. Freeman