Judge: James A. Mangione, Case: 37-2023-00029283-CU-OE-CTL, Date: 2023-10-13 Tentative Ruling

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA,

DEPT.:

EVENT DATE:

EVENT TIME:

HALL OF JUSTICE

TENTATIVE RULINGS - October 12, 2023

10/13/2023  09:00:00 AM  C-75 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO

JUDICIAL OFFICER:James A Mangione

CASE NO.:

CASE CATEGORY:

EVENT TYPE:

CASE TITLE: CASE TYPE:

Civil - Unlimited  Other employment Motion Hearing (Civil) 37-2023-00029283-CU-OE-CTL MORENO VS CEMAK TRUCKING INC [EFILE] CAUSAL DOCUMENT/DATE FILED:

Defendant Cemak Trucking, Inc.'s Motion to Compel Arbitration is granted.

The instant motion hinges on whether Plaintiff qualifies under 'any other class of workers engaged in foreign or interstate commerce.' This is a narrow exception, and it is Plaintiff's burden to demonstrate the exemption applies. (Performance Team Freight Systems, Inc. v. Aleman (2015) 241 Cal.App.4th 1233, 1240–1241.) In analyzing this exception, the Court begins 'by defining the relevant 'class of workers' to which [Plaintiff] belongs' and the determine 'whether that class of workers is 'engaged in foreign or interstate commerce.'' (Southwest Airlines Co. v. Saxon (2022) 142 S. Ct. 1783, 1788 [596 U.S. 450].) Here, Plaintiff is an intrastate delivery truck driver of raw cement-mix materials.

As an intrastate delivery driver, the transportation worker exception in Section 1 of the FAA only applies to Plaintiff is he can demonstrate that his intrastate transport of goods is part of 'the flow of interstate commerce.' (Nieto v. Fresno Beverage Co., Inc. (2019) 33 Cal.App.5th 274, 282.) '[M]erely being a delivery truck driver, by itself, [is not] enough since a transportation worker must also be actually engaged in the movement of goods in interstate commerce.' (Id.) Plaintiff must present evidence that the goods he delivers originate from, or potentially ship to, another state. Plaintiff's declaration fails to make any such showing. Instead, this case is more akin to Gulf Oil Corp. v. Copp Paving Co. (1974) 419 U.S.

186. There the Supreme Court held that 'a firm making intrastate sales of asphalt was not 'engaged in interstate commerce,' [citation], merely because the asphalt was later used to make interstate highways.' (Southwest Airlines Co., 142 S. Ct. at 1792 (quoting Gulf Oil Corp., 419 U.S. at 194, 198 (alterations omitted).) Because Plaintiff has failed to show that his deliveries are part of a larger stream of interstate commerce, Section 1 does not apply. Therefore, the FAA governs Plaintiff's claims, and the class action waiver is valid.

Defendant's objections to Plaintiff's Declaration are sustained as to objection nos. 2, 6, 8, 9, 11, 12, 14 and 15 and overruled as to objection nos. 1, 3-5, 7, 10 and 13.

The Court orders Plaintiff's individual claims to arbitration and dismisses his class action claims.

Plaintiff's representative PAGA claim is stayed pending arbitration.

The Court sets a status conference for May 24, 2023 at 9:45 a.m. in this Department.

The minute order is the order of the Court.

Calendar No.: Event ID:  TENTATIVE RULINGS

3009097  13