Superior Court of California 

County of Los Angeles 

Department 78 

¿ 

 

I. BACKGROUND 

Plaintiff Raffi Sadejyan (“Plaintiff”) filed this employment action against defendant Dreamstyle Remodeling of California, LLC (“Defendant”) alleging that Plaintiff was employed by Defendant as a Design/Sales Representative from May 9, 2022 to August 9, 2023. (Compl. ¶ 7.) On August 2, 2023, Plaintiff complained about lack of payment for a certain job, payment for approximately $20,000 of commissions as promised, and misclassification. (Id. ¶¶ 8-9.) As a result, Plaintiff was terminated from his employment. (Id. ¶ 9.) The complaint sets forth nine causes of action for (1) Breach of Contract, (2) Promissory Estoppel, (3) Retaliation, (4) Unfair Business Practices, (5) Wrongful Termination, (6) Failure to Pay Minimum, Regular, And Overtime Wages, (7) Failure to Pay Waiting Time (Wage Continuation) Penalties, (8) Failure to Provide Accurate, Itemized Wage Statements, and (9) Failure to Produce Personnel File and Payroll Records. 

On September 16, 2024, Defendant filed the instant petition to compel the matter to arbitration. 

On October 3, 2024, Plaintiff filed an opposition. 

On October 10, 2024, Defendant filed a reply. 

 

II. LEGAL STANDARD 

Under both the Federal Arbitration Act and California law, arbitration agreements are valid, irrevocable, and enforceable, except on such grounds that exist at law or equity for voiding a contract. (Winter v. Window Fashions Professions, Inc. (2008) 166 Cal.App.4th 943, 947.)¿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. The provisions must be stated verbatim or a copy must be physically or electronically attached to the petition and incorporated by reference.” (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1330.) The moving party must also establish the other party’s refusal to arbitrate the controversy.¿(Code of Civ. Proc. § 1281.2.)  

“Code of Civil Procedure section 1281.2 requires a trial court to grant a petition to compel arbitration ‘if the court determines that an agreement to arbitrate the controversy exists.’”¿(Avery v. Integrated Healthcare Holdings, Inc. (2013) 218 Cal.App.4th 50, 59 (quoting CCP § 1281.2).) Accordingly, “when presented with a petition to compel arbitration, the court’s first task is to determine whether the parties have in fact agreed to arbitrate the dispute.” (Ibid.) A petition to compel arbitration is in essence a suit in equity to compel specific performance of a contract. (Id. at 71.) As with any other specific performance claim, “a party seeking to enforce an arbitration agreement must show the agreement’s terms are sufficiently definite to enable the court to know what it is to enforce.” (Ibid. [internal citations omitted].)¿“Only the valid and binding agreement of the parties, including all material terms well-defined and clearly expressed, may be ordered specifically performed.”¿(Id.) An arbitration agreement “must be so interpreted as to give effect to the mutual intention of the parties as it existed at the time of contracting, so far as the same is ascertainable and lawful.” (Civ. Code, § 1636.)¿The language of the contract governs its interpretation if it is clear and explicit.¿(Civ. Code, § 1368.) If uncertainty exists, “the language of a contract should be interpreted most strongly against the party who caused the uncertainty to exist.”¿(Civ. Code, § 1654.) 

The party seeking to compel arbitration bears the burden of proving the existence of a valid arbitration agreement by the preponderance of the evidence.¿(Engalla v. Permanente Medical Group, Inc. (1997) 15 Cal.4th 951, 972.) It would then be plaintiff’s burden, in opposing the motion, to prove by a preponderance of the evidence any fact necessary to her opposition. (Ibid.) “In these summary proceedings the trial court sits as a trier of fact, weighing all the affidavits, declarations, and other documentary evidence, as well as oral testimony received at the court’s discretion, to reach a final determination.¿(Ibid.) 

 

III. DISCUSSION 

Defendant has provided a copy of the Arbitration Policy signed by Plaintiff. (Pitterson Decl. ¶ 3; Exh. A.) The Arbitration Policy provides, in relevant part, the following: 

“l. The Parties. As used herein, "Dreamstyle" refers to HomeRenew Buyer, Inc. dba Renovo Home Partners, Dreamstyle Remodeling of California, LLC (fka Dreamstyle Remodeling of California, Inc.), and Dreamstyle Remodeling, LLC (fka Dreamstyle Remodeling, Inc.), and their officers, directors, employees, owners, shareholders, members, agents, representatives, plans, sponsors, fiduciaries, agents, attorneys, parents, subsidiaries, and affiliated entities. Both you and Dreamstyle (collectively, the "Parties") voluntarily agree to abide by the Arbitration Policy ("the Arbitration Policy") as set forth herein. 

2. Notice. This document provides you with notice of the Arbitration Policy. By continuing your employment with Dreamstyle after receiving notice of the Arbitration Policy, you have expressly and voluntarily agreed to the terms and conditions of the Arbitration Policy, even if you do not sign this document. 

3. Mutuality. The Parties voluntarily agree to resolve all disputes, claims or controversies between the Parties through this Arbitration Policy, including but not limited to any disputes arising out of and/or relating to this Arbitration Policy, the employment relationship between the Parties, and/or the formation and/or termination of the employment relationship between the Parties.” 

Here, Plaintiff’s asserted claims against Defendant arise from his employment with Defendant, wherein Defendant alleges he was wrongfully terminated. Plaintiff’s claims against Defendant are therefore covered claims under the Arbitration Policy. Defendant has thus met its burden of demonstrating the existence of an arbitration agreement between the parties and that the subject claims are within the scope of the arbitration agreement. 

Because Defendant has met its burden, the burden shifts to Plaintiff to establish any defense, such as unconscionability.¿(Pinnacle Museum Tower Assn. v. Pinnacle Market Development (US), LLC (2012) 55 Cal.4th 223, 236.) 

Plaintiff does not dispute the existence of the arbitration agreement. Rather, Plaintiff’s  brief opposition argues only two points in a conclusory manner: (1) that Defendant did not meet and confer prior to the motion, and (2) the arbitration agreement only allows a maximum of two depositions per party and is procedurally unconscionable because Plaintiff intends to take three depositions. 

First, there is no meet and confer requirement. Plaintiff filing the lawsuit affirmatively establishes Plaintiff’s refusal to arbitrate. (See Hyundai Amco America, Inc. v. S3H, Inc. (2014) 232 Cal.App.4th 572, 577 [The filing of a lawsuit against the moving party for a controversy clearly within the scope of the arbitration agreement affirmatively establishes the other party’s refusal to arbitrate the controversy.].) 

Second, in terms of AAA’s discovery procedures, a presumptive limit on discovery is not unconscionable. This provision is insufficient to show an undue restriction of Plaintiff’s discovery rights, especially since the discovery clause expressly provides, “However, upon written request by a Party, the arbitrator has the authority to allow additional discovery, consistent with the expedited and limited nature of arbitration, but only if the moving Party can conclusively prove that the additional discovery is critically necessary to adjudicate the disputes between the Parties.” (Pitterson Decl. Exh. A at ¶ 8.). One of the purposes of arbitration is to limit the cost and time of litigation. Adequate discovery does not mean unfettered discovery. (See Armendariz v. Foundation Health Psychcare Servs. (2000) 24 Cal.4th 83, 105 [recognition that an arbitration agreement may require “something less than the full panoply of discovery provided in California Code of Civil Procedure, Section 1283.05.” (emphasis original)].) By agreeing to arbitration, Plaintiff has accepted certain limitations on discovery. Further, the clause provides leeway in which the Arbitrator may allow additional discovery as needed. 

As the party asserting unconscionability, Plaintiff has not met his burden of proving both procedural and substantive unconscionability. (Crippen v. Central Valley RV Outlet. Inc. (2004) 124 Cal.App.4th 1159, 1165). 

 

IV. CONCLUSION 

Based on the foregoing, defendant Dreamstyle Remodeling of California, LLC’s motion to compel arbitration is GRANTED. The case is stayed pending arbitration. 

 

Moving Party is ordered to give notice. 

 

DATED: October 17, 2024 

__________________________ 

Hon. Michelle C. Kim 

Judge of the Superior Court 

 

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 SMCDEPT78@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.