Judge: Marcella O. Mclaughlin, Case: 37-2023-00054264-CU-OE-CTL, Date: 2024-05-24 Tentative Ruling

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA,

DEPT.:

EVENT DATE:

EVENT TIME:

HALL OF JUSTICE

TENTATIVE RULINGS - May 23, 2024

05/24/2024  09:00:00 AM  C-72 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO

JUDICIAL OFFICER:Marcella O McLaughlin

CASE NO.:

CASE CATEGORY:

EVENT TYPE:

CASE TITLE: CASE TYPE:

Civil - Unlimited  Other employment Motion Hearing (Civil) 37-2023-00054264-CU-OE-CTL RODRIGUEZ VS EUROPA AUTO IMPORTS INC [IMAGED] CAUSAL DOCUMENT/DATE FILED: Petition - Subsequent Other, 01/22/2024

Defendant's motion to compel arbitration is DENIED.

A. Defendant's request for judicial notice is granted as to Exhibits 3 and 5 (Evid. Code § 452(c), (d)) and denied as to Exhibit 4. '[A] written trial court ruling has no precedential value.' Bolanos v. Superior Court (2008) 169 Cal.App.4th 744, 761.

B. Turning to the merits, '[t]he party seeking arbitration bears the burden of proving the existence of an arbitration agreement by the preponderance of the evidence.' Mendoza v. Trans Valley Transport (2022) 75 Cal.App.5th 748, 777. 'The trial court sits as a trier of facts, weighing all of the evidence submitted to reach a final determination.' Rogers v. Roseville SH, LLC (2022) 75 Cal.App.5th 1065, 1072.

Here, the four-page arbitration agreement submitted in connection with the motion states that it is between the 'Dealership' and 'Associate.' The agreement, however, does not define 'Dealership.' Nor does it mention defendant. 'It is essential to the validity of a contract, not only that the parties should exist, but that it should be possible to identify them.' Civ. Code § 1558.

Defendant argues that the parties can be identified from context and the surrounding circumstances.

The court disagrees. Defendant has not cited any case in which an arbitration agreement that completely failed to identify a contracting party was enforced. Moreover, even if the court considers extrinsic evidence of the surrounding circumstances, such evidence is conflicting. While plaintiff admits that he was employed by defendant (Rodriguez Decl., ¶ 4), the email transmitting the arbitration agreement was sent to him by Penske Automotive Group and does not reference defendant. (Von Prisk Supp. Decl., ¶ 6.) Based on the foregoing, the court concludes that defendant has failed to establish the existence of an arbitration agreement between the parties by a preponderance of the evidence. See Flores v. Nature's Best Distribution, LLC (2016) 7 Cal.App.5th 1, 9 (finding a lack of mutual assent where arbitration agreement did not identify parties); see also Balandran v. Labor Ready, Inc. (2004) 124 Cal.App.4th 1522, 1528 ('There is no policy in favor of arbitrating a dispute the parties did not agree to arbitrate.').

Accordingly, the motion is denied. Defendant has 15 days to plead to the complaint. Code Civ. Proc. § 1281.7.

Calendar No.: Event ID:  TENTATIVE RULINGS

3079898  8