Legal Opinion

Arshonsky v. Kim

California Court of Appeal, 5th District

Decided May 29, 2019No. B289308PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

WEINGART, J.**

*900David Kim appeals following the denial of his petition to compel arbitration of a fee dispute with his former attorneys pursuant to the Mandatory Fee Arbitration Act (MFAA), Business and Professions Code section 6200, et seq. As described more fully below, the MFAA permits a client 30 days in which to request nonbinding arbitration by a local bar association of any dispute involving attorneys' fees or costs before a collection related matter can proceed. The trial court found Kim waived his right to arbitration under the MFAA by failing to request arbitration within the required…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Aguilar v. LernerCalifornia Supreme Court · 2004
  2. Dana Point Safe Harbor Collective v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 2010
  3. Mercury Insurance Group v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1998
  4. Brock v. Kaiser Foundation HospitalsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1992
  5. Perez v. GrajalesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2008

14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Deck v. Developers Investment Co., Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2023
  2. Soni v. SimpleLayers, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2019
  3. Taylor v. Forde CA2/7California Court of Appeal · 2021

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API