Supreme Court of California

The mandatory fee arbitration act (MFAA), Bus. and Prof. Code section 6200 et seq., does not limit the ability of attorneys and clients to enter into binding contractual arbitration. The California Supreme Court rules that a court of appeal erred in holding that the MFAA's right to a trial de novo following statutory arbitration defeats any contractual obligation to arbitrate attorney-client fee disputes.

Appellate Information

• Decided 01/27/2009
• Published 01/27/2009

Judges

• MORENO, J.

Court

• Supreme Court of California

Counsel

• For Appellees:
  
• Howard Rice Nemerovski Canady Falk & Rabkin, Pamela Phillips, Ethan P. Schulman, Sean M. SeLegue, Jonas M. Nahoum, San Francisco;  Rogers Joseph O'Donnell & Phillips and Zachary M. Radford, San Francisco, for Defendant and Appellant., Cooley Godward Kronish, Paul A. Renne and Charles M. Schaible, San Francisco, for Nine Law Firms as Amici Curiae on behalf of Defendant and Appellant., Joseph L. Schatz, San Francisco, for Plaintiff and Respondent.