Judge: Linda S. Marks, Case: 2021-01232297, Date: 2022-10-10 Tentative Ruling

1. Motion to Compel Arbitration filed by Kyle Properties, LLC on 5/16/22
2. 2. Case Management Conference

Defendant John Gregory Pepin’s, Successor Trustee of the Lovella Family Trust dated 12/1/1983’s (“Defendant” or “PEPIN”) Motion to Compel Arbitration:

The Court finds that Defendant PEPIN met his initial burden of establishing that an agreement to arbitrate exists. Here, Defendant produced evidence that on August 10, 2021 he and Plaintiff KYLE entered into a residential real estate contract he (“Contract”) and the Contract contains an arbitration provision in paragraph 22B thereof which covers the claims asserted against him. (See Smith Decl., ¶ 2, Exh. 1, at paragraph 22B.)

Although the Contract states it is entered into Plaintiff KYLE as “Buyer” and Defendant PEPIN as “Seller” and is executed by Plaintiff Maloney as KYLE’s Manager, the Verified First Amended Complaint (“FAC”) alleges that Plaintiff MALONEY is also a party to the Contract and seeks to enforce his rights pursuant to same. The FAC alleges that “Plaintiffs and Pepin entered into a purchase agreement for the subject property”; that “Plaintiffs gave Defendants a good faith deposit of $39,000”; that “Plaintiffs sent an Amendment to the Purchase Agreement”; that “Plaintiffs cancelled the Purchase Agreement within the 3-day delivery pursuant to paragraph 10(6); that “Defendants...have refused to return Plaintiffs $39,000.00 deposit; that the “real estate agents and brokerage have failed and refused to initiate arbitration on behalf of Plaintiffs”; that Defendants have converted “Plaintiffs’ deposit”; and that Defendants have breached “their contract with Plaintiffs.” (See FAC, ¶¶ 13-23, 25, 26, and 33.)

“A nonsignatory can be compelled to arbitrate when a preexisting relationship existed between the nonsignatory and one of the parties to the arbitration agreement, making it equitable to compel the nonsignatory to arbitrate as well.” (JSM Tuscany, LLC v. Superior Ct. (2011) 193 Cal.App.4th 1222, 1240.)

“Additionally, a nonsignatory can be compelled to arbitrate when it is suing as a third-party beneficiary of the contract containing the arbitration clause.” (Id.)

The Court also finds that Plaintiffs failed to meet their burden of establishing the arbitration provision is both procedurally and substantively unconscionable. Plaintiffs failed to present any evidence to support their claims of unconscionability. The party opposing a motion to compel arbitration bears the burden of producing evidence of, and proving by a preponderance of the evidence, any fact necessary to the defense. (See Rosenthal v. Great Western Fin. Securities Corp. (1996) 14 Cal.4th 394, 413.)

Tentative Ruling: The Court ORDERS Plaintiffs to arbitrate their claims against Defendant PEPIN and ORDERS this action stayed as to the remaining defendants pursuant to C.C.P. section 1281.4.

Moving Party is to give notice.

The Court will set a date for a Status Conference re: Arbitration