Judge: Robert S. Draper, Case: 22STCV20738, Date: 2022-08-05 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22STCV20738    Hearing Date: August 5, 2022    Dept: 78

Superior Court of California 

County of Los Angeles 

Department 78 

Plaintiff Hamid Reza Tasharrofi’s Motion to Compel Arbitration is GRANTED. The parties are ordered to meet and confer on the identity and selection of an arbitrator and to file a joint report by August 16, 2022 advising the Court on whether they have reached agreement on the identity of the arbitrator.

In the event that the parties report that they have reached an agreement on the identity of an arbitrator, the Court will automatically set a six-month Post-Arbitration Status Conference. If the parties report that they are unable to agree on the identity of the arbitrator, on or before Aust 16, 2022 each party will nominate up to two arbitrators they would like the Court to select, who have agreed to conduct the arbitration, along with the terms of compensation and other details relating to the arbitrator. On or before August 18, 2022 each party will file any objections they have to the arbitrator nominated by the opposing party. The Court will then select one of the proposed arbitrators and set a six-month Post-Arbitration Status Conference, giving the parties notice of the identity of the arbitrator selected and the date and time for the Post Arbitration Status Conference.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND   

This is an action for underinsured motorist arbitration arising out of a car accident on December 29, 2019. (Petition ¶ 3.) Petitioner Hamid Reza Tasharrofi (“Petitioner”) brought this petition to open an unlimited civil action such that Petitioner could file a Motion to Compel Arbitration as to Respondent James River Insurance Company (“Respondent”). (Petition ¶ 6.)

PROCEDURAL HISTORY 

On June 24, 2022, Petitioner filed the Petition to Open Unlimited Civil Court File.

On July 7, 2022, Petitioner filed the instant Motion to Compel Arbitration.

On July 25, 2022, Respondent filed an Opposition.

On July 26, 2022, Petitioner filed a Reply.

DISCUSSION 

                         I.     MOTION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION

Petitioner moves the Court to compel arbitration.

California law reflects a strong public policy in favor of arbitration as a relatively quick and inexpensive method for resolving disputes. To further that policy, California Code of Civil Procedure section 1281.2 requires a trial court to enforce a written arbitration agreement unless one of three limited exceptions applies. Those statutory exceptions arise where (1) a party waives the right to arbitration; (2) grounds exist for revoking the arbitration agreement; and (3) pending litigation with a third party creates the possibility of conflicting rulings on common factual or legal issues.” (Acquire II, Ltd. v. Colton Real Estate Group (2013) 213 Cal.App.4th 959, 967 [citations omitted]; Code Civ. Proc. § 1281.2.) 

In deciding a motion to compel arbitration, trial courts must decide first whether an enforceable arbitration agreement exists between the parties, and then determine the second gateway issue whether the claims are covered within the scope of the agreement. (Omar v. Ralphs Grocery Co. (2004) 118 Cal.App.4th 955, 961.) The party seeking arbitration has the “burden of proving the existence of a valid arbitration agreement by a preponderance of the evidence, while a party opposing the petition bears the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence any fact necessary to its defense.” (Ruiz v. Moss Bros. Auto Group, Inc. (2014) 232 Cal.App.4th 836, 842.) The trial court “sits as the trier of fact, weighing all the affidavits, declarations, and other documentary evidence, and any oral testimony the court may receive at its discretion, to reach a final determination.” (Id.) General principles of contract law govern whether parties have entered a binding agreement to arbitrate. (Pinnacle Museum Tower Assn. v. Pinnacle Market Development (US), LLC (2012) 55 Cal.4th 223, 236; see also Winter v. Window Fashions Professions, Inc. (2008) 166 Cal.App.4th 943, 947.) 

Here, there is no debate as to the existence of an arbitration agreement, nor as to its applicability to the instant controversy. Accordingly,

The Court grants Petitioner’s Motion to Compel Arbitration. The parties are to jointly report to the court as set forth above status of their meet and confer efforts regarding the selection of the arbitrator and the Court will make further orders on the subject on this subject as necessary.

DATED:  July 22, 2022

___________________________

Hon. Robert S. Draper 

Judge of the Superior Court