Judge: Elaine W. Mandel, Case: 21SMCV01184, Date: 2023-10-16 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21SMCV01184    Hearing Date: March 19, 2024    Dept: P

Tentative Ruling

Yadegar v. Sayanian et al., Case No, 21SMCV01184

Hearing Date March 19, 2024

Plaintiff Yadegar’s Motion for the Defendants to Pay Arbitration Costs or to Lift the Stay and Set Trial (UNOPPOSED)

Plaintiff sued her prior attorney. On March 15, 2022 the court granted defendants’ motion to compel arbitration. Plaintiff moves for an order requiring defendant to pay the entirety of the arbitration fee or, in the alternative, to lift the stay of proceedings and return the matter to court.

Under Cal. Code of Civ. Proc. §1284.3(b)(1), “[a]ll fees and costs charged to or assessed upon a consumer party by a private arbitration company in a consumer arbitration, exclusive of arbitrator fees, shall be waived for an indigent consumer.”

Plaintiff cites Cinel v. Barna (2012) 206 Cal.App.4th 1382, arguing the case states an indigent party’s arbitration fees are waived, but the case does not so hold. In Cinel an indigent plaintiff failed to pay arbitrator’s fees; defendant also failed to pay. As a result, the court held defendant “waived their right to arbitrate by failing to reach a resolution with [plaintiff] on the fee dispute.” Id. at 1390. That finding relied on an arbitrator’s order that the paying parties reach an agreement to split the fees of the non-paying parties. Id. Cinel does not hold that party can force a matter out of arbitration simply by refusing to pay fees; that would be an untenable outcome. Cinel holds parties can wave the right to arbitrate by (a) refusing to pay fees and (b) disobeying an order from the arbitrator. Cinel is not analogous.

Roldan v. Callahan & Blaine (2013) 219 Cal.App.4th 87 is more directly on-point. That case holds where one party to an arbitration agreement is indigent and cannot afford arbitration fees, the court can present the other party a choice: “either pay that [indigent] plaintiff’s share of the arbitration cost and remain in arbitration or waive its right to arbitrate that plaintiff’s claim.” Id. at 96.

Like in Roldan plaintiff’s income of $2,000 per month is below the state and federal poverty levels. Yadegar decl. ¶8. Plaintiff demonstrates she would be unable to pay for the $25,000 cost of arbitration. Yadegar decl. ¶¶7, 8. There is no opposition, and no basis for the court to doubt Yadegar’s claims. Yadegar would be deprived of access to justice if she is made to pay arbitration fees. The court will offer defendants the choice given in Roldan: either they can pay Yadegar’s share of the arbitration cost and remain in arbitration, or waive the right to arbitration and allow the matter to be litigated in court. GRANTED.

Defendant to make its election within 10 court days.