ALEX BAAH v. SENTINEL CONSUMER SERVICES, INC

Filed 6/29/20 Baah v. Sentinel Consumer Services CA4/3

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION THREE

ALEX BAAH,

Plaintiff and Appellant,

v.

SENTINEL CONSUMER SERVICES, INC.,

Defendant and Respondent.

G058392

(Super. Ct. No. 30-2019-01050344)

O P I N I O N

Appeal from an order of the Superior Court of Orange County, James L. Crandall, Judge. Dismissed.

Alex Baah, in pro. per., for Plaintiff and Appellant.

Gaurav Bobby Kalra for Defendant and Respondent.

* * *

INTRODUCTION

Alex Baah appeals from an order denying his petition to vacate an arbitration award pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 1286.2. Such an order is not appealable; we therefore dismiss Baah’s appeal.

STATEMENT OF FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Baah began working for Sentinel Consumer Services, Inc. (Sentinel) in or about November 2017; at that time he signed an at will employment agreement and an arbitration agreement. Just a few weeks later, Sentinel terminated Baah’s employment. Baah filed a complaint in arbitration for retaliation, wrongful termination, and employment discrimination.

Following an evidentiary hearing, a binding arbitration award was issued November 5, 2018. The arbitrator found that Baah had failed to meet his burden of proof on any of his claims, and therefore found in favor of Sentinel and against Baah on all claims. Baah submitted a motion for reconsideration to set aside or revoke the arbitration award, which the arbitrator denied after further briefing. Baah then submitted a response to the order denying the motion for reconsideration.

In February 2019, Baah filed a petition to vacate the arbitration award. After briefing and a hearing, the trial court denied the petition. Baah filed a notice of appeal from the order denying the petition to vacate the arbitration award. Apparently, no judgment has been entered in the case. This court requested supplemental briefing from the parties regarding the appealability of an order denying a petition to vacate an arbitration award; each party filed a supplemental brief.

DISCUSSION

Code of Civil Procedure section 1294 provides the types of arbitration orders from which a party may appeal. “An aggrieved party may appeal from: [¶] (a) An order dismissing or denying a petition to compel arbitration. [¶] (b) An order dismissing a petition to confirm, correct or vacate an award. [¶] (c) An order vacating an award unless a rehearing in arbitration is ordered. [¶] (d) A judgment entered pursuant to this title. [¶] (e) A special order after final judgment.”

No appeal lies from an order denying a petition to vacate an arbitration award. (Cinel v. Christopher (2012) 203 Cal.App.4th 759, 766; Mid-Wilshire Associates v. O’Leary (1992) 7 Cal.App.4th 1450, 1453-1454.) In this case, Sentinel has yet to petition for confirmation of its arbitration award; therefore, no appealable judgment exists. There is nothing from which Baah can appeal. (Id. at p. 1454.)

In its supplemental brief, Sentinel contends: “[I]t appears [Baah]’s procedural availability to contest the underlying arbitration award has now been exhausted and this matter is closed.” While we take no position as to the merits of Baah’s challenge to the arbitration award, he is not barred from raising such a challenge if and when Sentinel ever seeks to confirm its arbitration award and have judgment entered. An order denying a petition to vacate an arbitration award is reviewable from a judgment on an order confirming the award. (Cooper v. Lavely & Singer Professional Corp. (2014) 230 Cal.App.4th 1, 10, fn. 3.)

DISPOSITION

The appeal is dismissed. In the interests of justice, neither party shall recover costs on appeal.

FYBEL, J.

WE CONCUR:

MOORE, ACTING P. J.

GOETHALS, J.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
Copy the code below to your web site.
x 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *