On behalf of ALF, I have submitted an amicus letter supporting a petition for review urging the California Supreme Court to resolve, inter alia, a disagreement among California lower courts about whether the losing party in an arbitration proceeding can challenge the arbitrator’s jurisdiction, for the first time, in the Court of Appeal after the trial court has confirmed the award without objection. The appeal to the California Supreme Court in NNN Capital Fund I, LLC v. Mickles, No. S296822, follows a substantial arbitration award for breach of certain fiduciary duties, and a split decision by the California Court of Appeal, Fourth Appellate District, vacating the award.
ALF’s amicus letter argues that allowing such an appeal conflicts with the Federal Arbitration Act’s and California Arbitration Act’s shared objective of encouraging and facilitating arbitration as an efficient and cost-effective method for resolving disputes with finality. The letter explains that the Court of Appeal’s majority opinion defeats the purpose of arbitration: The opinion “essentially transforms what is supposed to be an efficient substitute for costly and lengthy litigation into a vehicle for a losing party to compel the successful party to engage in burdensome litigation before receiving the award.”