Petition to Confirm, Correct, or Vacate Contractual Arbitration Award
25CV012226: KEVIN G. BROWN OWNER OF ROYAL BREEZE INC. vs FOSTER 06/09/2026 Hearing on Petition to Confirm, Correct, or Vacate Contractual Arbitration Award (Alternative Dispute Resolution) in Department 16D
Tentative Ruling
NOTICE:
Consistent with Local Rule 1.06(B), any party requesting oral argument on any matter on this calendar must comply with the following procedure:
To request limited oral argument, on any matter on this calendar, you must call the Law and Motion Oral Argument Request Line at (916) 874-2615 by 4:00 p.m. the Court day before the hearing and advise opposing counsel. At the time of requesting oral argument, the requesting party shall leave a voice mail message: a) identifying themselves as the party requesting oral argument; b) indicating the specific matter/motion for which they are requesting oral argument; and c) confirming that it has notified the opposing party of its intention to appear and that opposing party may appear via Zoom using the Zoom link and Meeting ID indicated below. If no request for oral argument is made, the tentative ruling becomes the final order of the Court.
Unless ordered to appear in person by the Court, parties may appear remotely either telephonically or by video conference via the Zoom video/audio conference platform with notice to the Court and all other parties in accordance with Code of Civil Procedure §367.75. Although remote participation is not required, the Court will presume all parties are appearing remotely for non-evidentiary civil hearings.
The Department 16D Zoom Link is https://saccourt-ca-gov.zoomgov.com/j/16146506749 and the Zoom Meeting ID is 161 4650 6749. To appear on Zoom telephonically, call (833) 568-8864 and enter the Zoom Meeting ID referenced above. NO COURTCALL APPEARANCES WILL BE ACCEPTED.
Parties requesting services of a court reporter will need to arrange for private court reporter services at their own expense, pursuant to Government code §68086 and California Rules of Court, Rule 2.956. Requirements for requesting a court reporter are listed in the Policy for Official Reporter Pro Tempore available on the Sacramento Superior Court website at https://www.saccourt.ca.gov/court-reporters/docs/crtrp-6a.pdf. Parties may contact Court- Approved Official Reporters Pro Tempore by utilizing the list of Court Approved Official Reporters Pro Tempore available at https://www.saccourt.ca.gov/court-reporters/docs/crtrp- 13.pdf.
Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities
Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”
A Stipulation and Appointment of Official Reporter Pro Tempore (CV/E-206) is required to be signed by each party, the private court reporter, and the Judge prior to the hearing, if not using a reporter from the Courts Approved Official Reporter Pro Tempore list.
Once the form is signed it must be filed with the clerk. If a litigant has been granted a fee waiver
25CV012226: KEVIN G. BROWN OWNER OF ROYAL BREEZE INC. vs FOSTER 06/09/2026 Hearing on Petition to Confirm, Correct, or Vacate Contractual Arbitration Award (Alternative Dispute Resolution) in Department 16D
and requests a court reporter, the party must submit a Request for Court Reporter by a Party with a Fee Waiver (CV/E-211) and it must be filed with the clerk at least 10 days prior to the hearing or at the time the proceeding is scheduled if less than 10 days away. Once approved, the clerk will forward the form to the Court Reporters Office and an official reporter will be provided.
TENTATIVE RULING:
*** NOTICE: EFFECTIVE APRIL 13, 2026, THIS DEPARTMENT HAS MOVED TO THE TANI G. CANTIL-SAKAUYE COURTHOUSE LOCATED AT 500 G STREET IN SACRAMENTO, CA. ALL MOTIONS NOTICED FOR DEPARTMENT 53 WILL BE HEARD IN DEPARTMENT 16D OF THE NEW COURTHOUSE. ALL PAPERS FOR THIS DEPARTMENT MUST BE FILED AT THIS NEW LOCATION AND WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED AT THE HALL OF JUSTICE. ALL HEARINGS WILL TAKE PLACE AT THIS NEW LOCATION. PARTIES MAY CONTINUE TO APPEAR REMOTELY IN DEPARTMENT 16D UNLESS SPECIFICALLY ORDERED OTHERWISE. ***
This matter was previously scheduled for hearing on January 6, 2026 for consideration of a Petition to Vacate Contractual Arbitration Award. The Court determined the original petition was filed by an individual, Kevin G. Brown (Brown) on behalf of Petitioner Royal Breeze, Inc. (Royal Breeze). As there was no evidence that Brown is a licensed attorney, the Court determined the petition was failed to conform with Code of Civil Procedure § 446 and the law prohibiting unlicensed attorneys from signing pleadings on behalf of a corporation. (See also Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 6125.) On its own motion, the Court therefore struck the petition, with leave to file an amended petition on or before May 4, 2026.
Royal Breeze did not file an amended petition. Accordingly, there is currently no petition to vacate pending for hearing at this time.
However, on August 6, 2026, Respondent Sylvia Foster filed a Response to Petition to Vacate Arbitration Award and Cross-Petition to Confirm Arbitration Award. As the Court stated in its January 6, 2026 Minute Order:
A cross-petition to confirm the award is properly included in a response to a petition to vacate an arbitration award. (Code Civ. Proc. § 1285.2.) If a petition or response under this chapter is duly served and filed, the court shall confirm the award as made, whether rendered in this state or another state, unless in accordance with this chapter it corrects the award and confirms it as corrected, vacates the award or dismisses the proceedings.
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO
25CV012226: KEVIN G. BROWN OWNER OF ROYAL BREEZE INC. vs FOSTER 06/09/2026 Hearing on Petition to Confirm, Correct, or Vacate Contractual Arbitration Award (Alternative Dispute Resolution) in Department 16D
(Code Civ. Proc. § 1286.) As a response was duly served and filed, the Court must consider Respondents cross-petition and determine whether the award shall be confirmed, corrected, vacated, or dismissed. As the Court has determined Royal Breeze should be granted leave to amend, the Court will continue the hearing so that Royal Breeze may have an opportunity to retained licensed California counsel that may file an amended petition to be heard concurrently with the cross-petition.
Having determined the cross-petition was properly pending, the Court noted that [i]f no amended petition is filed, the Court will proceed in addressing the crosspetition at the next hearing. (Minute Order, 01/06/2026.) Consistent with that ruling, the Court now considers the merits of Respondents cross-petition.
Respondents cross-petition to confirm the arbitration award is unopposed and GRANTED. Pursuant to Civil Code § 3287, Respondent is awarded prejudgment interest at the rate of 7% per annum from April 15, 2025 through the date of entry of judgment.
Respondents request for an award of costs and attorneys fees is denied, without prejudice, as they are not properly before the Court at this time. A party seeking costs must file a memorandum of costs within 15 days after the date of service of the notice of entry of judgment. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1700.) A prevailing party seeking a reasonable award of statutory or contractual attorneys fees must do so by noticed motion after judgment is entered and within the time permitted for an appeal of the judgment. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.170.)
Pursuant to Rules of Court, Rule 3.1312, Plaintiff shall submit a proposed order confirming the award and a proposed judgment for the Courts consideration.