Judge: Gregory Keosian, Case: 23STCV17920, Date: 2023-11-09 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23STCV17920    Hearing Date: November 9, 2023    Dept: 61

Defendant The Discovery House, LLC’s Motion to Compel Arbitration is GRANTED.

Defendants to provide notice.

I.                   MOTION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION

On petition of a party to an arbitration agreement to arbitrate a controversy, a court must order the petitioner and respondent to arbitrate the controversy if it determines the arbitration agreement exists, unless (1) the petitioner has waived its right to arbitrate; (2) grounds exist for the revocation of the agreement; or (3) “[a] party to the arbitration agreement is also a party to a pending court action or special proceeding with a third party, arising out of the same transaction or series of related transactions and there is a possibility of conflicting rulings on a common issue of law or fact.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 1281.2.)

“[T]he party moving to compel arbitration bears the burden of establishing the existence of a valid agreement to arbitrate, and the party opposing arbitration bears the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence any fact necessary to its defense. The role of the trial court is to sit as a trier of fact, weighing any affidavits, declarations, and other documentary evidence, together with oral testimony received at the court's discretion, to reach a determination on the issue of arbitrability.” (Hotels Nevada v. L.A. Pacific Center, Inc. (2006) 144 Cal.App.4th 754, 758.)

Defendant The Discovery House LLC (Defendant) presents an arbitration agreement executed by Plaintiff William Jenkins. (Peirano Decl. Exh. A.) The agreement contains a class action waiver and applies to “any dispute regarding employee’s employment.” (Ibid.) Plaintiff has filed a notice of non-opposition.

There being an arbitration agreement applicable to the present controversy, the motion is therefore GRANTED.