Judge: Jon R. Takasugi, Case: 23STCV14747, Date: 2023-12-12 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23STCV14747    Hearing Date: December 12, 2023    Dept: 17

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles

DEPARTMENT 17

TENTATIVE RULING

Defendants’ motion to compel arbitration is GRANTED. This action is ordered stayed pending the completion of arbitration. 

            On 6/26/2023, in pro per Plaintiff Divya Gowri (Plaintiff) filed suit against Greenberg Gross, LLP, Jeff Anderson & Associates, PA, Alan Greenberg, Deborah S. Mallgrave, Jenna E. Dunn, Brian L. Williams, Bailee B. Pelham, and Michael Reck (collectively, Defendants), alleging: (1) professional negligence; (2) breach of contract; (3) breach of fiduciary duty.

            Now, Defendants move to compel Plaintiff to arbitrate her Complaint, and stay this action pending the completion of arbitration.

Legal Standard

Where the Court has determined that an agreement to arbitrate a controversy exists, the Court shall order the petitioner and the respondent to arbitrate the controversy …unless it determines that…  grounds exist for rescission of the agreement.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 1281.2.) Among the grounds which can support rescission are fraud, duress, and unconscionability. (Tiri v. Lucky Chances, Inc. (2014) 226 Cal.App.4th 231, 239.) The Court may also decline to compel arbitration wherein there is possibility of conflicting rulings on a common issue of law or fact. (Code Civ. Proc., § 1281.2 (c).)

Discussion

The party moving to compel arbitration “bears the burden of proving [the] existence [of an arbitration agreement] by a preponderance of the evidence.” (Rosenthal v. Great Western Fin. Securities Corp. (1996) 14 Cal.4th 394, 413.) The moving party also bears the burden of demonstrating that the claims fall within the scope of the arbitration agreement. (Omar v. Ralphs Grocery Co. (2004) 118 Cal.App.4th 955, 961.)

            Here, Defendants submitted evidence that Plaintiff signed a Lawyer-Client Contingent Fee Agreement with Gowri (Engagement Agreement) that contains a binding arbitration provision. (Mallgrave Decl., Exh. A.) The arbitration provision requires that any controversy, claim, or dispute arising out of, or relating to, the Engagement Agreement, or the breach, termination, enforcement, interpretation or the validity of the Engagement Agreement, or relating otherwise to the lawyers’ representation of Gowri, shall be determined through binding arbitration to be administered by JAMS. The Engagement Agreement was signed by Gowri, Greenberg Gross LLP and Jeff Anderson & Associates, PA. The individual Greenberg Defendants – Alan Greenberg, Deborah S. Mallgrave, Jemma E. Dunn, Brian L. Williams and Bailee B. Pelham – were all attorneys at Greenberg Gross LLP during the representation of Gowri. Defendant Michael Reck was an attorney at Jeff Anderson & Associates, PA during the representation of Gowri.

            Plaintiff’s claims fall within the scope of the arbitration agreement, given that they arise out of allegations that Defendants’ performance of services breached the standard of care, and breached the Engagement Agreement and their fiduciary duties to her.

Given that Defendants have established by a preponderance of the evidence that an arbitration agreement exists, and that Plaintiff’s claims are covered by that agreement, the burden shifts to the Plaintiff to establish that the arbitration clause should not be enforced. (Pinnacle Museum Tower Assn. v. Pinnacle Market Development (US), LLC (2012) 55 Cal.4th 223, 236. (Pinnacle).)

            Plaintiff did not oppose the motion and thus has not met her burden to show that the arbitration agreement should not be enforced.

            Based on the foregoing, Defendants’ motion to compel arbitration is granted, and this action is ordered stayed pending the completion of arbitration.

It is so ordered.

Dated:  December    , 2023

   Hon. Jon R. Takasugi
   Judge of the Superior Court

Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the court at smcdept17@lacourt.org by 4 p.m. the day prior as directed by the instructions provided on the court website at www.lacourt.org.  If a party submits on the tentative, the party’s email must include the case number and must identify the party submitting on the tentative.  If all parties to a motion submit, the court will adopt this tentative as the final order.  If the department does not receive an email indicating the parties are submitting on the tentative and there are no appearances at the hearing, the motion may be placed off calendar.  For more information, please contact the court clerk at (213) 633-0517.