Judge: James A. Mangione, Case: 37-2023-00051808-CU-OE-CTL, Date: 2024-05-03 Tentative Ruling

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA,

DEPT.:

EVENT DATE:

EVENT TIME:

HALL OF JUSTICE

TENTATIVE RULINGS - May 02, 2024

05/03/2024  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) 37-2023-00051808-CU-OE-CTL HOWARD VS EP BROS INC [IMAGED] CAUSAL DOCUMENT/DATE FILED:

Defendants' Motion to Compel Arbitration is denied.

The Court finds that Plaintiff's claims are exempt from arbitration under the Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act of 2021 ('EFAA'). The EFAA states: 'Notwithstanding any other provision of this title, at the election of the person alleging conduct constituting a sexual harassment dispute or sexual assault dispute, or the named representative of a class or in a collective action alleging such conduct, no predispute arbitration agreement or predispute joint-action waiver shall be valid or enforceable with respect to a case which is filed under Federal, Tribal, or State law and relates to the sexual assault dispute or the sexual harassment dispute.' (9 U.S.C. § 402(a).) Whether a dispute qualifies 'shall be determined under Federal law.' (Id. § 402(b).) The EFAA defines a 'sexual harassment dispute' as 'a dispute relating to conduct that is alleged to constitute sexual harassment under applicable Federal, Tribal, or State law.' (9 U.S.C. § 401(4).) The EFAA applies 'with respect to any dispute or claim that arises or accrues on or after' March 2, 2022. (Kader v. Southern California Medical Center, Inc. (Cal. Ct. App. 2024) 317 Cal.Rptr.3d 682, 688.) Here, all of Plaintiff's claims stem from a single incident on December 27, 2022, in which Plaintiff alleges that Defendant Tyler Vaughn attempted to forcibly kiss Plaintiff. This qualifies as a sexual harassment dispute and therefore, cannot be compelled to arbitration. Although the Complaint contains a generic recitation of the elements of a claim for retaliation under Labor Code §§ 98.6 & 1102.5 extending beyond sexual harassment, it is clear from the factual allegations that all claims in the Complaint stem from the December 27 incident. Therefore, the Court finds no basis to compel the third cause of action to arbitration. To the extent that Defendants challenge the sufficiency of the factual allegations, a motion to compel arbitration is not the proper vehicle to do so.

The minute order is the order of the Court.

Calendar No.: Event ID:  TENTATIVE RULINGS

3085847  21