Judge Kenneth J. Medel, Case 37-2023-00007968-CU-OE-CTL 2024-03-22 Tentative Ruling

Judge: Kenneth J. Medel, Case: 37-2023-00007968-CU-OE-CTL, Date: 2024-03-22 Tentative Ruling

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA,

DEPT.:

EVENT DATE:

EVENT TIME:

HALL OF JUSTICE

TENTATIVE RULINGS - March 21, 2024

03/22/2024 09:30:00 AM C-66 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO

JUDICIAL OFFICER:Kenneth J Medel

CASE NO.:

CASE CATEGORY:

EVENT TYPE:

CASE TITLE: CASE TYPE:

Civil - Unlimited Other employment Motion Hearing (Civil) 37-2023-00007968-CU-OE-CTL SCHRAGER VS LACOSTE USA INC [IMAGED] CAUSAL DOCUMENT/DATE FILED: Motion - Other, 04/28/2023

Defendant Lacoste USA Inc.'s Motion to Compel Arbitration is GRANTED.

On September 1, 2022, as part of the onboarding process, Plaintiff signed the Arbitration Agreement as part of the terms and conditions of the job application. (Id. at ¶ 3.) The Arbitration Agreement signed by Plaintiff provides that Plaintiff and Defendant will 'resolve by final and binding arbitration any dispute, claim, or controversy, including but not limited to those related to Employee's employment with or termination of employment by Lacoste, its affiliated entities, or their respective officers, directors, employees, or agents.' (Id., Ex. A) The Arbitration Agreement also includes a class, collective and representative action waiver. The Arbitration Agreement states that 'the arbitration provisions . . . are exclusively governed by the Federal Arbitration Act ('FAA') . . . because [Defendants'] business involves interstate commerce.' (Id.) Based on the agreement, plaintiff is required resolve this dispute through binding arbitration pursuant to his signed Arbitration Agreement.

Based upon Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana, 142 S.Ct. 1906, 1913 (2022), plaintiff's individual PAGA claims are compelled to arbitration. On July 17, 2023, the California Supreme Court held, in Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc., 14 Cal.5th 1104 (2023), that a trial court may stay the non-individual PAGA claims while individual claims are arbitrated.

In this case, Plaintiff agreed, 'to the extent permitted by law,' to waive his right to bring a PAGA action on a representative basis. While this is an unenforceable waiver under California law, Lacoste and Plaintiff further agreed that any portion of the agreement were found to be invalid or unenforceable may be severed and 'the Agreement shall be modified to the minimum extent necessary to make it or its application valid.' Thus, the Court severs this claim and orders Plaintiff to arbitrate his individual PAGA claims. See Viking River Cruises, 142 S.Ct. at 1913; Adolph, 14 Cal.5th at 1114, 1123. The only exception in the severability clause is 'the limitation of the arbitrator's jurisdiction to individual employee claims.' The Court is striking the provision that prevents representative claims in Court and not affecting arbitrator jurisdiction. Because of the severability clause, this case is distinguishable from Demarinis v. Heritage Bank of Commerce, 98 Cal.App.5th 776 (2023) where the agreement at issue did not contain a severability clause.

This Court compel's plaintiff's individual Labor Code claims to arbitration and stays the representative PAGA action.

Calendar No.: Event ID: TENTATIVE RULINGS

3020752 24