Judge: Mark E. Windham, Case: 24STLC01077, Date: 2024-05-22 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 24STLC01077    Hearing Date: May 22, 2024    Dept: 26

Velazco v. Sandoval, et al.

PETITION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION AND STAY PROCEEDINGS

(CCP §§ 1281.2, et seq., 638)

TENTATIVE RULING:

Plaintiff Dianeth A. Jimenez Velazco’s Motion to Compel Arbitration is GRANTED. THE ACTION IS ORDERED TO ARBITRATION AT EITHER AAA OR JAMS AND STAYED PENDING ARBITRATION.

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE REGARDING STATUS OF ARBITRATION IS SET FOR NOVEMBER 20, 2024 AT 9:30 AM IN DEPARTMENT 26 IN THE SPRING STREET COURTHOUSE.

ANALYSIS:

On February 14, 2024, Plaintiff Dianeth A. Jimenez Velazco (“Plaintiff”) filed the instant

action for violation of Consumer Legal Remedies Act, violation of Business & Professions Code section 17200, et seq., and claim against surety against Defendants Norma E. Flores Sandoval dba Coco Auto Sales (“Defendant Sandoval”), Newport Acceptance Corp. (“Defendant NAC”), and Western Surety Company (“Defendant Western”). The action arises out of Plaintiff’s purchase of a motor vehicle regarding which certain facts were not disclosed. (Compl., filed 02/14/24, ¶¶16-43.) Defendants Western and NAC filed answers on April 9, 2024 and April 18, 2024, respectively.

Plaintiff filed the instant Motion to Compel Arbitration against Defendants Sandoval and NAC on March 14, 2024. No opposition has been filed to date.

Discussion

The Motion is brought pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 1281, et seq., which provides in relevant part:

On petition of a party to an arbitration agreement alleging the existence of a written agreement to arbitrate a controversy and that a party thereto refuses to arbitrate such 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 the revocation of the agreement.

(Code Civ. Proc., § 1281.2, subds. (a)-(b).) Plaintiffs provide evidence of the existence of the arbitration agreement in the Retail Installment Sales Contract (“RISC”). (Motion, Heydari Decl., Exh. 1, p. 5.) On April 26, 2023, Plaintiff requested that Defendants NAC and Sandoval agree to arbitrate the parties’ dispute. (Id. at Heydari Decl., ¶4 and Exh. 2.) Defendants NAC and Sandoval have not agreed to arbitration. (Id. at ¶6.) Also, Plaintiff’s request to AAA to arbitrate the dispute against Defendants NAC and Sandoval was denied due to their failure to comply with AAA’s policies. (Id. at ¶¶7-10 and Exhs. 3-4.) Therefore, Plaintiff has demonstrated that they are entitled to an order compelling Defendants Sandoval and NAC to arbitrate pursuant to the terms of the arbitration agreement. Plaintiff’s request that the arbitration be held at either AAA or JAMS is its right under the arbitration agreement. (Id. at Exh. 1, p. 6.)

The burden now shifts to Defendants to demonstrate waiver of Plaintiff’s right to arbitrate or grounds to rescind the arbitration agreement. As no opposition has been filed, however, no such grounds to deny the Motion has been shown.

Conclusion

Plaintiff Dianeth A. Jimenez Velazco’s Motion to Compel Arbitration is GRANTED. THE ACTION IS ORDERED TO ARBITRATION AT EITHER AAA OR JAMS AND STAYED PENDING ARBITRATION.

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE REGARDING STATUS OF ARBITRATION IS SET FOR NOVEMBER 20, 2024 AT 9:30 AM IN DEPARTMENT 26 IN THE SPRING STREET COURTHOUSE.

Moving party to give notice.