Judge: Michelle C. Kim, Case: 22STCV34279, Date: 2023-08-25 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22STCV34279    Hearing Date: September 8, 2023    Dept: 31

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA  

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT 

 

MARIELA ALONSO, 

Plaintiff(s),  

vs. 

 

3711 MENTONE PROPERTIES, LLC, ET AL., 

 

Defendant(s). 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

      CASE NO: 22STCV34279 

 

[TENTATIVE] ORDER RE: MOTION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION  

 

Dept. 31 

1:30 p.m.  

September 8, 2023 

 

On October 25, 2022, Plaintiff Mariela Alonso (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against defendants 3711 Mentone Properties, LLC (“Mentone”), Monem Corporation (“Monem”) (collectively, “Mentone Defendants”), and Seismic Retrofit Solutions Inc. (“SRS”) for damages arising from a trip and fall involving an unlevel ground floor created by construction plywood.   

At this time, the Mentone Defendants, move to compel arbitration against SRS, and to stay the action. SRS has not appeared in the action to date. This matter was initially heard on August 25, 2023 and the Court continued the hearing to September 8, 2023. (Min. Order, August 25, 2023.) 

The Mentone Defendants contend that Monem and SRS entered into a written contract in May 2020 pertaining to SRS’s soft story retrofit work on the property, which includes an express indemnity and arbitration provision. The Mentone Defendants seek to enforce the arbitration and indemnity provisions to obligate SRS to indemnify and defend the Mentone Defendants from Plaintiff’s claims. Further, the Mentone Defendants seek to stay Plaintiff’s action pending arbitration. 

Aside from Plaintiff’s pending action against SRS, the Mentone Defendants have not filed a cross-complaint against SRS. At the hearing on August 25, 2023, the Mentone Defendants contend that they did file a cross-complaint against SRS because they aver such an action may waive their right to arbitration pursuant to the Monem-SRS written contract.  

A proceeding to compel arbitration is in essence a suit in equity to compel specific performance of a contract. (Freeman v. State Farm Mutual Auto Insurance Co. (1975) 14 Cal.3d 473, 479.) There is no lawsuit pending by the Mentone Defendants against SRS, and therefore a petition, rather than a motion, must be filed in order to commence the arbitration proceeding. (Cal. Civ. Proc. § 1290.) It is only when a lawsuit is pending on a claim sought to be arbitrated that a motion for an order compelling arbitration may be filed in the pending suit.  

Accordingly, the motion to compel SRS to arbitration is premature and denied without prejudice. This ruling does not preclude the Mentone Defendants from bringing this motion again at the appropriate juncture. 

 

Moving Defendants are ordered to give notice.   

 

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE: 

  • Parties are encouraged to meet and confer after reading this tentative ruling to see if they can reach an agreement. 

  • If a party intends to submit on this tentative ruling,¿the party must send an email to the court at¿sscdept31@lacourt.org¿with the Subject line “SUBMIT” followed by the case number.¿ The body of the email must include the hearing date and time, counsel’s contact information, and the identity of the party submitting.¿¿ 

  • Unless¿all¿parties submit by email to this tentative ruling, the parties should arrange to appear remotely (encouraged) or in person for oral argument.¿ You should assume that others may appear at the hearing to argue.¿¿ 

  • If the parties neither submit nor appear at hearing, the Court may take the motion off calendar or adopt the tentative ruling as the order of the Court.¿ After the Court has issued a tentative ruling, the Court may prohibit the withdrawal of the subject motion without leave.¿ 

Dated this 7th day of September 2023 

 

  

 

 

Hon. Michelle C. Kim 

Judge of the Superior Court