Filed 6/30/26 DeCarolis v. Grecco CA2/8
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions
not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion
has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION EIGHT
PATRICK DECAROLIS JR et al., B339556
Petitioners and Los Angeles County
Respondents, Super. Ct. No. 23SMCP00262
v.
MICHAEL GRECCO,
Respondent and Appellant.
APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los
Angeles County, Mark A. Young, Judge. Affirmed.
Michael Grecco, in propria persona; GELB Law and Yisrael
Gelb for Respondent and Appellant.
Hinshaw & Culbertson, David T. Hayek, Jennifer K.
Saunders, and Sara Franks for Petitioners and Respondents.
____________________
Michael Grecco hired attorney Patrick DeCarolis and his
law firm in connection with Grecco’s post-divorce proceedings.
Unhappy with DeCarolis’s representation, Grecco brought a
claim in arbitration. The arbitrator ruled in DeCarolis’s favor.
DeCarolis petitioned to confirm the arbitral award, but Grecco
sought to vacate the award based on arbitrator misconduct. The
trial court confirmed the award. We affirm. Statutory citations
are to the Code of Civil Procedure.
A stipulated judgment resolved divorce proceedings
between Grecco and his wife Tony Berlin in 2013. It gave Berlin
a first option to purchase one of the couple’s properties under
certain circumstances. It likewise gave Grecco a right to
purchase if Berlin failed to do so. In January 2020, the parties
entered into a court-approved post-judgment stipulation that
modified the portion of the judgment concerning Berlin’s first
option right. The parties disagreed about what the stipulation
required.
Grecco hired DeCarolis and DeCarolis Family Law Group
to take over his representation. We refer to both as DeCarolis.
Grecco told DeCarolis his priority was to be able to exercise
his option and purchase the property. Grecco and DeCarolis
agreed any disputes between the two would go to arbitration.
During the time Grecco changed counsel, Berlin sought an
ex parte extension of her deadline to exercise her option, due to
Grecco’s lack of cooperation. Although DeCarolis was in the
courthouse the morning of the hearing, he was not in the
courtroom at the time the court called the matter. The court took
the matter under submission without argument and ruled in
Berlin’s favor.
After additional proceedings, Berlin ultimately purchased
the property. Grecco brought a claim in arbitration against
DeCarolis for professional negligence. DeCarolis counterclaimed
for breach of contract and account stated for services rendered.
2
Retired judge Elizabeth R. Feffer was the arbitrator.
Counsel represented both sides. After the proceedings, the
arbitrator issued an interim award in favor of DeCarolis.
DeCarolis then filed a motion regarding attorney fees and costs.
The arbitrator granted this motion.
DeCarolis petitioned to confirm the arbitration award.
Grecco opposed the petition and asked the court to vacate the
award based on misconduct by the arbitrator. Grecco’s
declaration stated, “During the arbitration hearing there were
multiple occasions when the participants went ‘off the record’ to
take short breaks. At least twice during those breaks, on two
different days, I personally observed and heard Arbitrator Feffer
look at and speak directly to Patrick DeCarolis, reminding him
that she was an experienced family law judge and that she was
available for family law mediations at any time.”
The arbitrator filed her own declaration with the court in
which she stated, “Mr. Grecco’s allegations against me are
completely and totally false, and are as patently absurd as they
are fabricated.” Patrick DeCarolis filed a declaration in which he
disputed Grecco’s allegations in strong terms. DeCarolis’s
arbitration counsel also filed a declaration stating he heard no
such comments. An insurance monitor present at the arbitration
also declared he heard no such thing.
Judge Mark Young granted DeCarolis’s petition to affirm
and denied Grecco’s request to vacate the award. In his ruling,
he found that, “as a matter of fact, the arbitrator did not make
those solicitations. Grecco provides an entirely self-serving
allegation that he heard the Arbitrator twice solicit opposing
counsel during breaks in the Arbitration. Aside from this
conclusory statement, [which] contain[s] no details, Grecco
3
provides no corroborating evidence.” Judge Young further noted
that a family law judge “found that Grecco lacked credibility and
engaged in ‘suspect’ litigation behavior,” leading to sanctions.
Grecco appeals Judge Young’s order confirming the
arbitration award.
Grecco attacks the order on a number of grounds. He has
forfeited all but the sole ground he raised before the trial court.
Because Grecco did not establish a valid ground for vacating an
arbitration award existed, we affirm.
We independently review a trial court’s ruling on a petition
to affirm or vacate an arbitration award. (Valencia v. Mendoza
(2024) 103 Cal.App.5th 427, 442 (Valencia).) We defer to any
factual finding the trial court made if there is substantial
evidence to support it. (Ibid.)
An arbitration award can only be challenged on certain
grounds. (Malek Media Grp., LLC v. AXQG Corp. (2020) 58
Cal.App.5th 817, 827.) Mere errors in law or fact are generally
insufficient. (Heimlich v. Shivji (2019) 7 Cal.5th 350, 367
(Heimlich).) Instead, the challenger must establish a statutory
ground for vacating or correcting an award. (Haworth v. Superior
Ct. (2010) 50 Cal.4th 372, 387.) Sections 1286.2 and 1286.6
enumerate these grounds.
Grecco invoked two grounds: (1) “there was corruption in
… the arbitrator” and (2) “the rights of the party were
substantially prejudiced by misconduct of a neutral arbitrator.”
(§ 1286.2, subds. (a)(2) & (a)(3).) Both grounds concerned the
arbitrator’s alleged solicitation of work from DeCarolis.
We defer to the trial court’s findings of fact where
substantial evidence supports them. (Valencia, supra, 103
Cal.App.5th at p. 442.) Grecco submitted a declaration in which
4
he stated he heard the arbitrator solicit DeCarolis for work
during the arbitration. He gave no details about these
conversations. His attorney offered no declaration. Grecco did
not say he spoke to his counsel, or anyone else, about what he
claimed he heard. The first time Grecco aired this allegation was
in opposition to DeCarolis’s petition to affirm the award.
Against Grecco’s lone and uncorroborated allegation stood
the testimony of four contrary witnesses: the arbitrator,
DeCarolis, DeCarolis’ counsel, and an insurance monitor.
Grecco’s conduct caused a judge to question his credibility.
We defer to this substantial evidence.
There is no basis to vacate the award. Grecco forfeited
arguments he did not offer to the trial court. These forfeited
claims include Grecco’s attempts to offer additional evidence of
arbitrator bias.
Grecco challenges the arbitrator’s application of law and
finding of facts. Neither can generally be challenged, as Grecco
concedes. (Heimlich, supra, 7 Cal.5th at p. 367.) Grecco cites
cases in which the Supreme Court found an arbitration award
could be reviewed on legal grounds, but this was true where the
arbitration agreement, unlike this one, explicitly provided for
such review. (See, e.g., Cable Connection, Inc. v. DIRECTV, Inc.
(2008) 44 Cal.4th 1334, 1339–1340, 1361.)
Grecco now charges the arbitrator exceeded her
jurisdiction. He asserts that the arbitration agreement did not
allow for this scope of arbitration but identifies no limiting
language in the agreement. In an attempt to avoid forfeiture, he
cites Loving & Evans v. Blick (1949) 33 Cal.2d 603 (Loving) for
the proposition that issues of jurisdiction may be raised after
arbitration in the trial court. In affirming this point from Loving,
5
however, the Supreme Court also affirmed that such arguments
can be forfeited if not timely made. (Law Finance Group, LLC v.
Key (2024) 14 Cal.5th 932, 958–959 [“Just as an appellant may
forfeit the opportunity to vindicate her statutory rights by failing
to preserve an issue in the trial court or by failing to file a timely
notice of appeal, so too, in a postarbitration judicial proceeding to
enforce an arbitral award, a challenger may forfeit the
opportunity to raise a claim of contract illegality by failing to
timely request that the arbitration award be corrected or
vacated”].)
Grecco failed to raise this point in arbitration as well as
before the trial court. Moreover, Grecco cannot submit his cause
to arbitration and only after losing assert that the arbitration
was improper. (Kemper v. Schardt (1983) 143 Cal.App.3d 557,
561 [after losing in arbitration “is too late for appellant to now
complain that the arbitrator was without jurisdiction to
determine the issue”].)
We deny Grecco’s motions for judicial notice as moot.
DISPOSITION
We affirm the order and award costs to DeCarolis.
WILEY, J.
We concur:
STRATTON, P. J. VIRAMONTES, J.
6