From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Kurtin v. Elieff

Court of Appeals of California, Fourth District, Division Three.
May 8, 2013
215 Cal.App.4th 1224 (Cal. Ct. App. 2013)

Opinion

No. G043999.

05-08-2013

TODD KURTIN, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. BRUCE ELIEFF, Defendant and Appellant.


[Modification of opinion (215 Cal.App.4th 455; ___ Cal.Rptr.3d ___), upon denial of rehearing.]

THE COURT. — The petition for rehearing filed April 30, 2013 is DENIED.

The opinion filed April 16, 2013 is hereby modified in the following particulars:

(1) On page 5 of the slip opinion [215 Cal.App.4th 460, advance report, 3d par., lines 1-2], in the first sentence of the first full paragraph, delete the words "including Moorpark and SJD" so that the sentence reads: "After the arbitration, Kurtin filed this action against Elieff and the Joint Entities."

(2) On page 22 of the slip opinion [215 Cal.App.4th 473, advance report, 1st full par., lines 1-3], in the first sentence of the first full paragraph, the word "not" should be inserted between "are" and "necessarily" so that the sentence reads: "Third, and most importantly, the last antecedent rule strongly indicates the arbitrator's powers are not necessarily pinned down by a requirement to only be exercised to `save' the agreement."

These modifications do not affect the judgment.


Summaries of

Kurtin v. Elieff

Court of Appeals of California, Fourth District, Division Three.
May 8, 2013
215 Cal.App.4th 1224 (Cal. Ct. App. 2013)
Case details for

Kurtin v. Elieff

Case Details

Full title:TODD KURTIN, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. BRUCE ELIEFF, Defendant and…

Court:Court of Appeals of California, Fourth District, Division Three.

Date published: May 8, 2013

Citations

215 Cal.App.4th 1224 (Cal. Ct. App. 2013)