Judge: Latrice A. G. Byrdsong, Case: 23STLC06413, Date: 2024-02-01 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 23STLC06413 Hearing Date: February 1, 2024 Dept: 25
Hearing Date: Thursday, February 01, 2024
Case Name: RAYMOND
STODDARD, an individual v. EXTRA SPACE STORAGE, INC., a Maryland Corporation
and DOES 1 to 10, inclusive,
Case No.: 23STLC06413
Motion: Motion to Compel Arbitration and
to Dismiss this Action or Alternatively to Stay all Judicial Proceedings to
Allow Arbitration to Take Place.
Moving Party: Defendant
Extra Space Management, Inc.
Responding Party: None
Notice: OK
Tentative Ruling: Defendant Extra Space
Management, Inc.’s Motion to Compel Arbitration and to Stay Civil Proceedings is
GRANTED.
The matter is STAYED pending a
final resolution of Plaintiff’s claims in the arbitration proceedings as
provided by the parties’ agreement.
Conference Re:
Status of Arbitration Proceedings is scheduled for OCTOBER 2, 2024 at
9:30 a.m. in Department 25 of the Spring Street Courthouse.
Counsel are ordered to file a JOINT Report Re: Status of
Arbitration Proceedings, 5-court days prior to 10/02/2024. (this is an appearance date)
SERVICE:
[X]
Proof of Service Timely Filed (CRC, rule 3.1300) OK
[X]
Correct Address (CCP §§ 1013, 1013a) OK
[X]
16/21 Court Days Lapsed (CCP §§ 12c, 1005(b)) OK
OPPOSITION: None filed as of January 19, 2024 [ ] Late [X] None
REPLY: None filed as of January 25, 2024 [ ] Late [X] None
BACKGROUND
On October 05, 2023, Plaintiff
Raymond Stoddard (“Plaintiff”) brought two causes of action against Defendant
Extra Space Management, Inc., erroneously sued as Extra Space Storage, Inc.,
(“Defendant”) for breach of contract and negligence.
On December 08, 2023, Defendant
filed the instant Motion to Compel Arbitration.
No opposition has been filed.
MOVING PARTY
POSITION
Defendant prays for the Court to
issue an order compelling Plaintiff to arbitrate his claims against Defendant
pursuant to the parties’ written arbitration agreement. Defendant argues that Plaintiff
entered a written contract with respect to the leasing of Storage Unit 1607F,
which contained a valid arbitration provision requiring arbitration of any
controversy, claim or dispute arising out of, or relating to the contract. Defendant
additionally moves for an order either dismissing the action or alternatively
staying the proceeding during the pendency of the arbitration pursuant to CCP §
1281.4.
OPPOSITION
No
opposition has been filed.
REPLY
No reply
has been filed.
ANALYSIS
I. Legal
Standard
“A party who
claims that there is a written agreement to arbitrate may petition the superior
court for an order to compel arbitration” pursuant to California Code of Civil
Procedure section 1281.2. (Banner Entertainment, Inc. v. Superior Court
(1998) 62 Cal.App.4th 348, 356.) “California law, like federal law, favors
enforcement of valid arbitration agreements.” (Armendariz v. Foundation
Health Psychcare Services, Inc. (2000) 24 Cal.4th 83, 97.) “On petition of
a party to an arbitration agreement alleging the existence of a written
agreement to arbitrate a controversy and that a party to the agreement refuses
to arbitrate that controversy, the court shall order the petitioner and the
respondent to arbitrate the controversy if it determines that an agreement to
arbitrate the controversy exists, unless it determines that: (a) The right to
compel arbitration has been waived by the petitioner; or (b) Grounds exist for
rescission of the agreement.” (Code Civ. Proc. § 1281.2.) A party opposing a
petition to compel arbitration “bears the burden of proving by a preponderance
of the evidence any fact necessary to its defense.” (Banner Entertainment,
Inc. v. Superior Court, supra, 62 Cal.App.4th 348, 356.)
“[T]he writing
memorializing an arbitration agreement need not be signed by both parties in
order to be upheld as a binding arbitration agreement.” Serafin v. Balco
Properties Ltd., LLC (2015) 235 Cal.App.4th 165, 176. “[I]t is not the presence
or absence of a signature which is dispositive; it is the presence or absence
of evidence of an agreement to arbitrate which matters.” (Banner
Entertainment, Inc. v. Superior Court, supra, 62 Cal.App.4th 348, 361.)
Where a motion to
compel arbitration is granted, a court “shall, upon motion of a party to such
action or proceeding, stay the action or proceeding until an arbitration is had
in accordance with the order to arbitrate or until such earlier time as the court
specifies.” (Code Civ. Proc. § 1281.4.)
II. Discussion
Defendant brings
the instant motion seeking to compel Plaintiff to submit to arbitration
according to the parties’ rental agreement of storage space unit 1607F under
Code of Civil Procedure § 1281.2.
Here, Defendant
provides evidence of the arbitration agreement it entered into with Plaintiff.
(Mot., Ehtisham Raja Decl. ¶ 3, Exh. A, p. 2 at “Arbitration”; Exh. B; Exh. C.)
The arbitration agreement states that,
…Customer agrees that, either Customer or Operator may elect
to resolve any dispute by neutral, binding arbitration, on an individual basis
only, and not by a court action, subject to the exceptions and terms set forth
below. Customer acknowledges that he/she had the option of entering into an
Agreement without an Arbitration provision, but voluntarily chose to enter into
an Agreement with an Arbitration provision.
(Id.) Thus, based on the preceding,
the Court finds an enforceable arbitration agreement between the parties.
Here,
Defendant provides evidence that Plaintiff has not agreed to arbitration.
(Motion, Danielle A. Kieler Decl. ¶ 6.) The Court notes that Plaintiff does not
assert any defense to enforcement of the arbitration agreement, such as a
waiver or other grounds to revoke the agreement. The Court further notes that
“California law, ‘like [federal law], reflects a strong policy favoring
arbitration agreements and requires close judicial scrutiny of waiver claims.’”
(Wagner Const. Co. v. Pacific Mechanical Corp. (2007)
41 Cal.4th 19, 31.) Therefore, the Court finds that Defendant is entitled to an
order compelling Plaintiff to arbitration.
The Court
further notes that the arbitration agreement provides that,
“Unless Customer and Operator each agree
otherwise, the Arbitration will be conducted by a single, neutral third-party
arbitrator. OPERATOR AND CUSTOMER WAIVE THEIR RIGHT TO TRIAL BY JURY OR IN A
COURT. The party initiating the arbitration shall select the arbitration
organization, subject to the other party’s agreement to use such arbitration
organization, which shall not unreasonably be withheld. Unless otherwise
agreed, the arbitration shall take place within the County where the
defendant/respondent resides. The applicable rules of the arbitration
organization will govern the arbitration.”
(Motion, Raja Decl., Exh. A, p. 2 at
“Arbitration.”) Here, the Court notes that while Defendant does not provide the
Court with the name of the arbitration organization, the agreement lays out a
procedure by which the parties will initiate and conduct arbitration. Thus, the
Court finds the parties' dispute can be sufficiently arbitrated under CCP §
1281.6.
The Court also
finds that a stay of the action is appropriate in this case once the motion is
granted, as Code of Civil Procedure § 1281.4 stipulates that the Court shall
stay the action until arbitration is completed. (Code Civ. Proc., § 1281.4.)
Accordingly,
the Court GRANTS Defendant’s Motion to Compel Arbitration.
II. Conclusion
Defendant Extra Space Management, Inc.’s Motion to Compel Arbitration
and Stay All Judicial Proceedings is GRANTED.
The 04/03/2025 Trial is advanced to this date and hereby taken off calendar/vacated.
Conference Re:
Status of Arbitration Proceedings is scheduled for OCTOBER 2, 2024 at
9:30 a.m. in Department 25 of the Spring Street Courthouse.
Counsel are ordered to file a JOINT
Report Re: Status of Arbitration Proceedings, 5-court days prior to
10/02/2024. (this is an appearance
date)
Moving party is ordered to give notice.