Judge: Christopher K. Lui, Case: 21STCV45944, Date: 2022-08-03 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STCV45944    Hearing Date: August 3, 2022    Dept: 76

Pursuant to California Rule of Court 3.1308(a)(1), the Court does not desire oral argument on the motion addressed herein.  As required by Rule 3.1308(a)(2), any party seeking oral argument must notify ALL OTHER PARTIES and the staff of Department 76 of their intent to appear and argue.  Notice to Department 76 may be sent by email to smcdept76@lacourt.org or telephonically at 213-830-0776.  If notice of intention to appear is not given and the parties do not appear, the Court will adopt the tentative ruling as the final ruling.

            Defendant Russ Bassett Corp. moves to stay the action pending the US Supreme Court’s decision in Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana or dismiss Plaintiff’s PAGA claims.

TENTATIVE RULING       

Defendant Russ Bassett Corp.’s motion to stay or dismiss the action is DENIED.

ANALYSIS

Motion To Stay or Dismiss Action

Evidentiary Objections

            Plaintiff’s objection to Exhibit A (the arbitration agreement) of Steinbeck’s declaration is SUSTAINED. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1110(g); Evid. Code §753(a).)

Discussion

            Defendant Russ Bassett Corp. moves to stay the action pending the US Supreme Court’s decision in Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana or dismiss Plaintiff’s PAGA claims.

            Defendant’s request to stay the action pending a decision in the Viking River case is no longer necessary, as Viking River has been decided.  Defendant requests in reply that the Court compel Plaintiff’s non-individual PAGA claim to arbitration and dismiss or stay Plaintiff’s non-individual claim. (Reply, p. 1, fn. 1.)  However, Defendant must file a noticed motion to compel arbitration. The request made in reply is improper. Further, even if the Court were inclined to address the merits of the issue as framed in the reply, the Court cannot grant the request as Defendant has not attached an admissible arbitration agreement. The agreement attached is in a foreign language. As Plaintiff points out in its objection, Defendant fails to establish pages 3-4 of Exhibit A are an English translation of the Spanish pages certified under oath by a qualified interpreter. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1110(g).)  In t

            The motion is DENIED.