Judge: Maurice A. Leiter, Case: 23STCV23579, Date: 2024-01-08 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23STCV23579    Hearing Date: January 8, 2024    Dept: 54

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles

 

PERRY VIVES, as an individual; IRENE VIVES, an individual,

 

 

 

Plaintiffs,

 

Case No.:

 

 

23STCV23579

 

vs.

 

 

Tentative Ruling

 

800 Remodeling, Inc., a California corporation, ELAD FADLON, an individual, DOES 1 through 10, inclusive,

 

 

 

Defendants.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Hearing Date: January 8, 2024

Department 54, Judge Maurice Leiter

Motion to Compel Arbitration and Motion to Stay Proceedings

Moving Party: Defendants 800 Remodeling Inc., and Elan Fadlon

Responding Party: None, motion is unopposed.

 

T/R:     THE MOTION TO COMPEL IS GRANTED.

 

DEFENDANT TO GIVE NOTICE.

 

If the parties wish to submit on the tentative, please email the courtroom at¿SMCdept54@lacourt.org¿with notice to opposing counsel (or self-represented party) before 8:30 am on the day of the hearing.

 

            The Court considered the moving papers. No opposition has been received.

 

 

BACKGROUND

 

            Perry and Irene Vives entered into a contract on August 29, 2022 with Elad Fadlon through 800 Remodeling Inc., for remodeling work to be completed at their residence. Plaintiffs allege that Defendants never completed the work as agreed; they filed suit on September 28, 2023 alleging four causes of action: (1) breach of contract, (2) intentional misrepresentation, (3) conversion, (4) breach of covenant of good faith and fair dealing.

 

            Defendants move to compel arbitration.    

 

The party moving to compel arbitration must establish the existence of a written arbitration agreement between the parties. (Code of Civ. Proc. § 1281.2.) This is usually done by presenting a copy of the signed, written agreement to the court. A petition to compel arbitration or to stay proceedings pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure sections 1281.2 and 1281.4 must state, in addition to other required allegations, the provisions of the written agreement and the paragraph that provides for arbitration.

 

            Defendants attach, as Exhibit A, what appears to be part of an arbitration agreement which states that “…any controversy or claim arising out or related to this contract or breach thereof shall be settled by binding arbitration…”. The document is signed by both parties. As the moving party, Defendants must also establish Plaintiff’s refusal to arbitrate the controversy; the filing of this lawsuit suffices.

 

            Defendants have established an agreement to arbitrate. Plaintiffs have no opposition, and therefore have not shown any reason why this motion should not be granted.