Your recipients will receive an email with this envelope shortly and will be able to access it on trellis. You can always see your envelopes by clicking the Inbox on the top right hand corner.
Your subscription has successfully been upgraded.
<< Previous Rule[ Back to Title Index ]Next Rule >>| Printer-friendly version of this page2024 California Rules of Court
Standard 3. Application and effective date
(a) Except as otherwise provided in this standard and standard 8, these standards apply to all persons who are appointed to serve as neutral arbitrators on or after July 1, 2002, in any arbitration under an arbitration agreement, if:
(1) The arbitration agreement is subject to the provisions of title 9 of part III of the Code of Civil Procedure (commencing with section 1280); or
(2) The arbitration hearing is to be conducted in California.
(b) These standards do not apply to:
(1) Party arbitrators, as defined in these standards; or
(2) Any arbitrator serving in:
(A) An international arbitration proceeding subject to the provisions of title 9.3 of part III of the Code of Civil Procedure;
(B) A judicial arbitration proceeding subject to the provisions of chapter 2.5 of title 3 of part III of the Code of Civil Procedure;
(C) An attorney-client fee arbitration proceeding subject to the provisions of article 13 of chapter 4 of division 3 of the Business and Professions Code;
(D) An automobile warranty dispute resolution process certified under California Code of Regulations title 16, division 33.1 or an informal dispute settlement procedure under Code of Federal Regulations title 16, chapter 1, part 703;
(E) An arbitration of a workers' compensation dispute under Labor Code sections 5270 through 5277;
(F) An arbitration conducted by the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board under Labor Code section 5308;
(G) An arbitration of a complaint filed against a contractor with the Contractors State License Board under Business and Professions Code sections 7085 through 7085.7;
(H) An arbitration conducted under or arising out of public or private sector labor-relations laws, regulations, charter provisions, ordinances, statutes, or agreements; or
(I) An arbitration proceeding governed by rules adopted by a securities self-regulatory organization and approved by the United States Securities and Exchange Commission under federal law.
(Subd (b) amended effective July 1, 2014.)
(c) The following persons are not subject to the standards or to specific amendments to the standards in certain arbitrations:
(1) Persons who are serving in arbitrations in which they were appointed to serve as arbitrators before July 1, 2002, are not subject to these standards in those arbitrations.
(2) Persons who are serving in arbitrations in which they were appointed to serve as arbitrators before January 1, 2003, are not subject to standard 8 in those arbitrations.
(3) Persons who are serving in arbitrations in which they were appointed to serve as arbitrators before July 1, 2014, are not subject to the amendments to standards 2, 7, 8, 12, 16, and 17 that took effect July 1, 2014 in those arbitrations.
(Subd (c) amended effective July 1, 2014.)
In the pending motion, Miller indicates that, pursuant to the parties’ settlement agreement, they agreed to have removed from the public record section 3 (pages 8-11) of the Fee Order. (Motion at 3:6-11.) Miller contends that he gave up his right to appeal the Fee Order with the express understanding that section 3 of the Fee Order would be removed from the public record. Id.) Miller now moves for an order vacating and/or sealing section 3 of the Fee Order. The motion is unopposed.
SCARECROW VISUAL EFFECTS INC VS ANDREW MILLER
BC543719
Sep 23, 2016
Los Angeles County, CA
Lastly, section 3 of the proposed order incorrectly reflects a finding of personal service. Counsel to give notice.
DUTY V. CHU
30-2018-01039953-CU-PA-CJC
Mar 11, 2019
Orange County, CA
Singer fails to demonstrate that (1) Lumar’s payment of $120,000 in fees and costs was a condition precedent to his transfer of Parcel B to Atico under Section 3(d); and (2) based on the evidence presented on this motion, including the language of 3(d), his interpretation of Section 3(d) is reasonable. In contrast, Lumar’s interpretation of its obligation under Section 3(d) is reasonable based on the express language of Section 3(d).
LUMAR, LLC, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABLILITY COMPANY, ET AL. VS RONALD SINGER, ET AL.
20SMCV00078
Apr 29, 2021
H. Jay Ford
Los Angeles County, CA
Section 3 is, by its terms, an agreement between Shelton and an entity named TriNet. Fenn does not explain who “TriNet” is or how it relates to Shelton’s employment in its motion. Fenn’s name appears only in a header to Section 3 where it is identified as the “client”. Section 3 is not signed by Fenn. Section 3 is signed only by Shelton. There is no signature line for TriNet or any other party.
FENN TERMITE AND PEST CONTROL INC. VS SHELTON
30-2018-01013880-CU-BC-CJC
Feb 07, 2020
Orange County, CA
The Second Amended Complaint (“SAC”) appears to meet the definition in Article XIII, Section 3, which requires vessels of more than 50 tons’ burden. That is alleged. (SAC, paragraph 12) Article XIII, Section 3 also requires that the vessels be “engaged in the transportation of freight or passengers.” That is also alleged, as the courts have interpreted that phrase. The phrase has been interpreted to mean that a vessel must be carrying goods that someone is paying to be transported. In Dragich v.
MANSON CONSTRUCTION VS. CONTRA
MSC17-00713
Apr 05, 2018
Steve K. Austin
Contra Costa County, CA
Jun 17, 2019
Active
Antelope Valley
Los Angeles County, CA
Trust (General Jurisdiction)
Probate
Trusts
Feb 14, 2018
Default Judgment
Fresno County
Fresno County, CA
Jan 04, 2009
Other
Los Angeles County
Los Angeles County, CA
Joint Petition for Summary Dissolution (General Jurisdiction)
Commercial
Dissolution
May 08, 2018
Other
Los Angeles County
Los Angeles County, CA
DV Prevention w/ Minor Children (General Jurisdiction)
Family
Domestic Violence
Jul 23, 2018
Judgment (Other)
Fresno County
Fresno County, CA
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO Fontana District 17780 Arrow Boulevard Fontana California 92335 www.sb-court.org …
Feb 14, 2023
Judgment Entered
San Bernardino County, CA
Oct 04, 2023
Small Claims $5,001 - $10,000
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY 0F SAN BERNARDINO Fontana District 17780 Arrow Boulevard Fontana California 92335 www.sb-court.org 909-350-9322 …
Sep 13, 2019
Under Court Supervision
San Bernardino County, CA
Oct 21, 2023
Petition for Letters of Administration
Electronically FILED by Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles 2/25/2019 2:30 PM Sherri R. Carter, Executive Officer/Clerk, By E. Alvarez, D eputy Clerk SEKI, NISHIMURA & WATASE, LLP ANDREW C. PONGRACZ (SBN 258554) 600 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 1250 Los Angeles, California 90017 Tel.: (213) 481-2869 Fax: (213) 481-2871 …
Jul 09, 2018
Statistical Disposition 04/22/2019
Los Angeles County, CA
Feb 25, 2019
Decedent's Estate (General Jurisdiction)
Electronically FILED by Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles 2/25/2019 2:30 PM Sherri R. Carter, Executive Officer/Clerk, By E. Alvarez, Deputy Clerk 1 SEKI, NISHIMURA & WATASE, LLP ANDREW C. PONGRACZ (SBN 258554) 2 600 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 1250 Los Angeles, California 90017 3 Tel.: (213) 481-2869 Fax: (213) 481-2871 …
Jul 09, 2018
Statistical Disposition 04/22/2019
Los Angeles County, CA
Feb 25, 2019
Decedent's Estate (General Jurisdiction)
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY 0F SAN BERNARDINO Fontana District 17780 Arrow Boulevard Fontana California 92335 www.sb-court.org 909-350-9322 …
Jun 11, 2020
Judgment Entered
San Bernardino County, CA
Apr 28, 2021
Small Claims $5,001 - $10,000
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
Please wait a moment while we load this page.