Legal Opinion

Rosenson v. Greenberg Glusker Fields Claman & Machtinger LLP

California Court of Appeal

Decided February 15, 2012No. B233399PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

KRIEGLER, J.

A retainer agreement between a client and a law firm provided for binding arbitration of fee disputes. The parties initially participated in nonbinding arbitration pursuant to the Mandatory Fee Arbitration Act (MFAA; Bus. & Prof. Code, § 6200 et seq.).1 Within 30 days of a nonbinding MFAA arbitration award in favor of the client, the law firm filed a demand for binding arbitration under the retainer agreement. Rather than participate in binding arbitration, the client filed a petition to confirm the arbitration award. Agreeing with the client, the trial court ruled the law…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Wells v. One2One Learning FoundationCalifornia Supreme Court · 2006
  2. Aguilar v. LernerCalifornia Supreme Court · 2004
  3. Wagner Construction Co. v. Pacific Mechanical Corp.California Supreme Court · 2007
  4. Spear v. California State Automobile Ass'nCalifornia Supreme Court · 1992
  5. Schatz v. Allen Matkins Leck Gamble & Mallory LLPCalifornia Supreme Court · 2009

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Judge v. Nijjar Realty, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2014
  2. Arshonsky v. Kim, California Court of Appeal, 5th District2019
  3. Naegele v. AlbersDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2013
  4. Hofer v. BoladianCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2025
  5. Knitter & Knitter v. Du Par CA1/3California Court of Appeal · 2021

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

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

Powered by the Exa API