Judge: Glenn R. Salter, Case: 22-1257729, Date: 2022-10-06 Tentative Ruling

Motion to Compel Arbitration

The motion of the defendant to compel arbitration is GRANTED.

The defendant met its burden to show that there is an enforceable arbitration agreement.  The plaintiff’s declaration in opposition is unsigned and is therefore not admissible evidence.  (Gonzalez v. Kalu (2006) 140 Cal.App.4th 21, 26, fn. 2.)  But even if it were signed, it is not persuasive.  The assertions are general and obviously inaccurate on their face, as pointed out in the reply.  Moreover, the declarations in support of the reply demonstrate that the statements of fact in the plaintiff’s declaration are simply wrong.

The plaintiff has failed to meet her burden to show that the arbitration agreement is unenforceable.  The agreement provides for neutral arbitrators, adequate discovery, a written award, all types of relief that would be available in court, and it does not require the plaintiff to pay unreasonable fees and costs in order to participate in the process.  (See Armendariz v. Foundation Health Psychcare Services, Inc. (2000) 24 Cal.4th 83, 102.)

This action is STAYED pending further order.  The court sets an ADR Review Hearing for May 11, 2023, at 8:30 am.

Case Management Conference

Given the motion to compel arbitration has been granted, the Case Management Conference is OFF CALENDAR.

Notice

The defendant shall give notice.