Civil Litigation,
Alternative Dispute Resolution
Oct. 22, 2010
A Profound Blow Against Arbitration
A recent judicial panel opinion impugns the character of lawyers and would-be arbitrators who do pro bono work.
Timothy D. Reuben
Reuben MediationTim Reuben spent more than 40 years handling complex legal disputes in California's state and federal courts. As the founder and managing partner of Reuben Raucher & Blum in Los Angeles, he has worked on a wide range of matters through jury and bench trials, arbitration, mediation, judicial reference, and settlement conferences across multiple areas of civil law, including commercial, real estate, construction, employment, intellectual property, insurance, professional liability, and unfair competition.
The 1st District Court of Appeal has concluded that an arbitrator ruling on a dispute over legal fees had the appearance of bias simply because he was a lawyer at a big firm whose practice sometimes included representing lawyers in fee disputes. In Benjamin, Weill & Mazur v. Kors, 2010 DJDAR 15482, Justice J. Anthony Kline, writing for a unanimous panel (Justices Paul Haerle and James Richman concurring), reversed the confirmation of a $102,287 fee award because attorney Sean ...
For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$795 for an entire year!
Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)
Already a subscriber?
Sign In