Judge: Nick A. Dourbetas, Case: 2021-01236532, Date: 2022-09-16 Tentative Ruling

1. Motion to Compel Arbitration

2. Case Management Conference

Defendants PAC Auto Group, Inc., dba Pacific Auto Center’s and Ally Bank’s Motion to Compel Arbitration is granted in part and continued in part. (See Code Civ. Proc. § 1281.2, et seq.)

The motion to compel binding arbitration is GRANTED. 

Defendants met their burden to show a written arbitration agreement exists that covers plaintiff’s claims.  (See Code Civ. Proc., § 1281.2; see also Rosenthal v. Great Western Fin. Securities Corp. (1996) 14 Cal.4th 394, 413 [elements]; (Sirey Dec. Exh. 1, pg. 2).)

All of plaintiffs’ causes of action “arise out of” or are “in connection with” the purchase, sale, and condition of the subject vehicle.   (Ex. A; see EFund Capital Partners v. Pless (2007) 150 Cal.App.4th 1311, 1322; Coast Plaza Doctors Hospital v. Blue Cross of California (2000) 83 Cal.App.4th 677, 684.)

Plaintiffs failed to meet their shifted burden to show grounds for not enforcing the arbitration agreement between the parties, specifically that defendants waived their right to arbitration.

Plaintiffs are ordered to submit their claims against defendants PAC Auto Group, Inc., dba “Pacific Auto Center” and Ally Bank to binding arbitration pursuant to their agreement.

This action is stayed pending completion of arbitration, excepting the continued hearing of this motion, and the pending motion to compel arbitration by defendant Ford. (See Code Civ. Proc., § 1281.4.) 

***THE COURT NOTES IT HAS NO RECORD OF MOVING PAPERS FOR A MOTION TO COMPEL ON BEHALF OF DEFENDANT FORD.

This motion is continued solely as to the issue of who will act as arbitrator.

The court treats plaintiffs’ opposition as a petition under California Code of Civil Procedure, section 1281.6 to appoint an arbitrator. Plaintiffs and defendants are to submit a joint list of arbitrators to the court within fifteen days. From that list, the court will nominate five arbitrators and advise the parties by minute order. The parties shall have five days from receipt of the nominated list to agree upon an arbitrator, or the court will assign the arbitrator to arbitrate the case. (See Code Civ. Proc. § 1281.6.)

The court sets a status conference re binding arbitration for April 10, 2023, at 9:00 a.m.

The court rules as follows on defendants’ evidentiary objections:

Declaration of Michelle Cook.

1.       Overruled.

2-4     Sustained, hearsay.

5.       Sustained, lack of foundation.

6.       Overruled.

7.       Sustained, hearsay.

8-18    Overruled.

19-32  Sustained, relevance.

Declaration of Christopher P. Barry.

1-5     Sustained, relevance.

The court declined to consider defendants’ reply declaration and evidence. (See Jay v. Mahaffey (2013) 218 Cal.App.4th 1522, 1537-38 [reply evidence on anti-SLAPP motion]). 

Defendants are ordered to give notice.