Judge Olivia Rosales, Case 21NWCV00391 2022-09-13 Tentative Ruling

Judge: Olivia Rosales, Case: 21NWCV00391, Date: 2022-09-13 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21NWCV00391 Hearing Date: September 13, 2022 Dept: SEC

FLORES v. SUNRISE FOOD SERVICE, INC.

CASE NO.: 21NWCV00391

HEARING: 9/13/22 @ 9:30 AM

TENTATIVE RULING

Defendant Sunrise Food Service, Inc.’s petition to compel arbitration is GRANTED as to the individual claims. The representative claims are STAYED.

Moving party to give NOTICE.

Defendant Sunrise Food Service, Inc. moves to compel arbitration pursuant to CCP § 1281.2.

A written agreement to submit to arbitration an existing controversy or a controversy thereafter arising is valid, enforceable and irrevocable, save upon such grounds as exist for the revocation of any contract. (CCP § 1281.) The court must grant the petition to compel arbitration unless it finds either: no written agreement to arbitrate exists; the right to compel arbitration has been waived; grounds exist for revocation of the agreement; or litigation is pending that may render the arbitration unnecessary or create conflicting rulings on common issues. (CCP § 1281.2.)

Plaintiff’s Complaint, filed on June 17, 2021, asserts a single cause of action for PAGA violations.

It is undisputed that the parties entered into an arbitration agreement.

Based on the recent United States Supreme Court opinion in Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana, 142 S.Ct. 1906 (2022), all of Plaintiff’s individual claims are subject to binding arbitration.

In opposition, Plaintiff requests that the court stay the matter because a petition for rehearing was filed on July 6, 2022, which makes the ruling non-binding. (RJN, Ex. C; US Rules of Court 45.2.) However, on August 22, 2022, the Supreme Court denied the petition for rehearing. (See case history of Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana, 142 S.Ct. 1906 (2022).)

The U.S. Supreme Court in Viking River held that a plaintiff loses standing to assert a representative PAGA claim once her own individual claims are compelled to arbitration. (Viking River, supra, 142 S.Ct. at p. 1925.) However, the California Supreme Court has held that a plaintiff retains standing even after their individual claims are settled. (Kim v. Reins International California, Inc. (2020) 9 Cal.5th 73, 80.)

Because PAGA standing may be a state law issue, and the California Supreme Court is poised to hear this issue in Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc., No. S274671 (rev. granted July 20, 2022), this court will sever the representative claims from the individual claims, and stay the representative claims pending the arbitration of the individual claims and/or further instruction from the California Supreme Court.

Accordingly, the motion is GRANTED as to the individual claims. The representative claims are STAYED.