Martinez v. Martinez
Plaintiffs and respondents Pedro Martinez and Ana Martinez (plaintiffs) sued defendant and appellant Jose Daniel Martinez (defendant)[1] for specific performance of an agreement to convey real property. The parties stipulated in the trial court to submit the dispute to binding arbitration pursuant to the arbitration clause in their agreement, but defendant thereafter refused to cooperate in the selection of an arbitrator. After nine months of delay in the arbitration, plaintiffs filed in the trial court a request to enter defendants default with respect to an amended complaint, and the clerk entered a default. After several more months of delay by defendant, the trial court scheduled and held a hearing on plaintiffs motion for entry of judgment, granted the motion, and entered judgment on the default against defendant in the amount of $327,121.
On appeal from various orders and the judgment of the trial court, defendant contends, inter alia, that the trial court lacked the jurisdiction to enter a default judgment against him because the parties had stipulated to arbitrate their dispute pursuant to the arbitration clause in their agreement. We hold that once the parties stipulated to arbitrate their dispute and the trial court enforced that stipulation by referring the matter to arbitration, it lacked the power to enter a default judgment against defendant. Court therefore reverse the order granting plaintiffs motion to enter judgment and the judgment based on that order.
Comments on Martinez v. Martinez