Judge Elaine W. Mandel, Case Number: 24SMCV00441, Date: 2024-08-02 Tentative Ruling

Judge: Elaine W. Mandel, Case: 24SMCV00441, Date: 2024-08-02 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 24SMCV00441 Hearing Date: August 2, 2024 Dept: P

Tentative Ruling

James Rivers Insurance Co. v. Alexis Alvelo, Case No. 24SMCV00441

Hearing Date: August 02, 2024

James River Insurance Co’s Motion to Compel Arbitration - UNOPPOSED

James River Insurance Co. (“JRIC”) brings an uninsured motorist claim against Alvelo based on a motor vehicle accident on February 24, 2017. JRIC moves to compel arbitration, arguing the matter should be submitted to binding arbitration pursuant to Insurance Code § 11580.2(f) and CCP §128, et seq. No opposition has been filed.

Under California law, the trial court has authority to compel arbitration pursuant to CCP §1281.2 where a written agreement for such arbitration exists and one of the parties refuses to arbitrate.¿ Specifically, the statute provides that, “[o]n petition of a party to an arbitration agreement alleging the existence of a written agreement to arbitrate a controversy and that a party thereto refuses to arbitrate such controversy, the court shall order the petitioner and the respondent to arbitrate the controversy if it determines that an agreement arbitrate the controversy exists.”¿

“[T]he petitioner bears the burden of proving the existence of a valid arbitration agreement by the preponderance of the evidence . . . .”¿¿Giuliano v. Inland Empire Personnel, Inc.¿(2007) 149 Cal.App.4th 1276, 1284¿(Guiliano).¿“In determining whether an arbitration agreement applies to a specific dispute, the court may examine only the agreement itself and the complaint filed by the party refusing arbitration [citation]. The court should attempt to give effect to the parties' intentions, in light of the usual and ordinary meaning of the contractual language and the¿circumstances under which the agreement was made.” Weeks v. Crow¿(1980) 113 Cal.App.3d 350, 353.¿ “To determine whether a contractual arbitration clause requires arbitration of a particular controversy, the controversy is first identified and the issue is whether that controversy is within the scope of the contractual arbitration clause.” Titolo¿v. Cano¿(2007) 157 Cal.App.4th 310, 316.

“[A] party opposing the petition bears the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence any fact necessary to its defense. [Citation.] In these summary proceedings, the trial court sits as a trier of fact, weighing all the affidavits, declarations, and other documentary evidence, as well as oral testimony received at the court's discretion, to reach a final determination.” Giuliano, supra, at 1284.

JRIC requests an order compelling arbitration. The action arises out of Alvelo’s uninsured motorist claim against JRIC. Vahdat Decl. ¶ 2. At the time of the accident, Alvelo was using Uber for ride-sharing services as an independent driver. Id. ¶ 3. JRIC provides a copy of the parties' agreement which states:

a. If we and an "insured" disagree whether the "insured" is legally entitled to recover damages from the owner or driver of an "uninsured motor vehicle" or do not agree as to the amount of damages that are recoverable by that "insured", the disagreement will be settled by arbitration. Such arbitration may be initiated by a written demand for arbitration made by either party. The arbitration shall be conducted by a single neutral arbitrator. However, disputes concerning coverage under this endorsement may not be arbitrated. Each party will bear the expenses of the arbitrator equally. Id.; Exh. A.

Alvelo does not file an opposition. JRIC satisfied tis burden under CCP §1281.2. The agreement covers the action because a dispute exists between the parties regarding the uninsured motorist’s claim. Since an agreement to arbitrate exists and there are no defenses to enforcement, the motion is GRANTED.

JRIC’s counsel states in February 2024, the parties agreed to arbitrate with Hon. Benny Osorio. Vahdat Decl. ¶ 7; Exh. C. Under Code of Civil Procedure § 1281.4, the court stays the proceedings pending the resolution of plaintiff’s claims through arbitration. GRANTED.