- The court will address arbitrator authority vs. court “jurisdiction” principles. The case tees up a conflict between the rule that jurisdiction can be raised at any time and the rule that arbitration awards can be vacated only on narrow grounds.
- Timing of standing challenges is central. The challenge at issue was not pressed in the trial court confirmation phase and was raised on appeal after the merits were decided, raising concerns about gamesmanship and waiver-like dynamics in arbitration practice.
- The decision could affect finality and strategy in California arbitrations. If courts can more freely revisit standing after an award, parties may face increased post-award litigation risk; if deference is reinforced, parties may be incentivized to raise standing objections early and preserve them through proper procedural channels.
Media Mention
When Arbitration Isn’t the Final Word
Daily Journal’s The Doghouse Report
August 21, 2026Estimated Read Time: 1 min
Key Takeaways
Neil Popović was quoted in “When Arbitration Isn’t the Final Word,” in the Daily Journal’s The Doghouse Report about the California Supreme Court’s pending review of NNN Capital Fund I LLC v. Mikles et al as a case that could reshape how much deference courts must give an arbitrator’s decision on a party’s standing. The dispute stems from a $21 million arbitration award for breach of fiduciary duty and fraud arising out of the dissolution of a real estate financing company. An Orange County Superior Court judge confirmed the award, but a divided Court of Appeal vacated the judgment and sent the matter back for further proceedings, concluding the standing question was not fully resolved. A dissenting justice warned that allowing a late-raised standing challenge to undo an arbitration result threatens the finality arbitration is designed to provide.
The high court said it will focus on the deference owed to the arbitrator’s standing determination. Popović, noted the practical concern that parties may “lay in wait” and raise standing only after losing on the merits, potentially turning arbitration into prolonged litigation.