Judge: Alison Mackenzie, Case: BC675696, Date: 2023-12-12 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: BC675696    Hearing Date: April 12, 2024    Dept: 55

NATURE OF PROCEEDINGS:  Petition of Defendants/Petitioners to Confirm Arbitration Award [Regarding Plaintiff Maria Estela Rosas].

The unopposed petition is granted, as prayed.

Background

Three plaintiffs filed a Complaint, including allegations that a plaintiff was sexually harassed by an assistant supervisor and coworkers, and experienced adverse employment actions after complaining.  The causes of action are: 1. Sex Discrimination In Violation Of FEHA; 2. National Origin Discrimination In Violation Of FEHA; 3, Sexual Harassment/Hostile Work Environment; 4. Retaliation/Protected Activity; 5. Failure To Prevent Discrimination And Harassment; 6. Aiding And Abetting; 7. Wrongful Termination In Violation Of Cal, Gov. Code § 12940(H); and 8. Violation Of Unfair Competition Law, Bus, & Prof. Code § 17200 et seq.

The Court granted a Motion to Compel Arbitration, as to all three plaintiffs in this case. The Court entered an order that case numbers BC675696 and 21STCV17412 are deemed related. The Court confirmed an arbitration award, based on a petition addressing Plaintiff/Respondent ERIKA VALADEZ and EFREN LARA, including based on the arbitration award finding a bar of the Statute of Limitations. Plaintiffs filed a notice of appeal as to the order confirming the award.  In the meantime, Defendants filed a petition to confirm an arbitration award, as to Plaintiff/Respondent MARIA ESTELA ROSAS. 

According to Court of Appeal records, in appellate case number B318125, an opinion has affirmed Judge Malcome Mackey’s arbitration ruling regarding VALADEZ and LARA.

Moving parties request the Court confirm the arbitration award as to Respondent MARIA ESTELA ROSAS, on bases including the following: 1)  A JAMS arbitration award was made, awarding nothing to either side, on 8/2/21; and, 2) the Arbitrator, after reviewing all submissions, dismissed Claimant’s case, finding that her case was barred by statutes of limitations, but that the issue was complicated and not frivolously disputed.  No opposition has been filed to consider.

Legal Standard

Unless a petition or response seeking to correct or vacate an arbitration award was filed properly based upon valid grounds, or the proceeding is dismissed, courts are required to enter judgment in conformity with the award. Valsan Partners Ltd. Partnership v. Calcor Space Facility (1994) 25 Cal.App.4^th 809, 818.

Analysis

The petition has merit because it is based upon an arbitration award and no plaintiff filed a response to the petition. Further, overlapping issues were involved as to the instant petition, and the similar petition of a co-plaintiff, such as the awards finding that the Statute of Limitations expired. As to such issues, the appellate opinion in case number B318125 resolved them against plaintiffs.

Conclusion

Therefore, the Court grants the petition.