Judge Salvatore Sirna, Case Number: 25PSCP00066, Date: 2025-03-17 Tentative Ruling

The Court may change tentative rulings at any time. Therefore, counsel are advised to check this website periodically to determine whether any changes or updates have been made to the tentative ruling. Counsel may submit on a tentative ruling by calling the clerk in Department G at (909) 802-1104 prior to 8:30 a.m. the morning of the hearing.

Petitioner Barbara Jastrab’s Petition to Compel Arbitration is CONTINUED to a date to be determined at the hearing set in Department G (Pomona).

This is an action to compel arbitration. On January 21, 2025, Petitioner Uribel Valverde Mayo filed a petition to compel arbitration against Respondent Aspire General Insurance (Aspire).

Valverde Mayo seeks to compel Aspire to arbitrate Valverde Mayo’s uninsured/underinsured motorist coverage claims pursuant to Insurance Code section 11580.2, subdivision (f). For the following reasons, the court CONTINUES the hearing on Valverde Mayo’s petition.

“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.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 1281.) The court must grant a petition to compel arbitration unless it finds 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. (Code Civ. Proc., § 1281.2.) A petition to compel arbitration functions as a motion. (Code Civ. Proc., § 1290.2.)

In a motion or petition to compel arbitration, “the moving party bears the burden of producing ‘prima facie evidence of a written agreement to arbitrate the controversy.’” (Gamboa v. Northeast Community Clinic (2021) 72 Cal.App.5th 158, 165 (Gamboa).) Once the court finds an arbitration agreement exists, the party opposing arbitration bears the burden of establishing a defense to enforcement by a preponderance of the evidence. (Rosenthal v. Great Western Fin. Securities Corp. (1996) 14 Cal.4th 394, 413.) In interpreting an arbitration agreement, courts apply the same principles used to interpret contractual provisions with the fundamental goal of giving effect to the parties’ mutual intentions and applying contractual language if clear and explicit. (Valencia v. Smyth (2010) 185 Cal.App.4th 153, 177.) Because public policy strongly favors arbitration, “any doubts regarding the arbitrability of a dispute are resolved in favor of arbitration.” (Coast Plaza Doctors Hosp. v. Blue Cross of California (2000) 83 Cal.App.4th 677, 686.)

“A copy of the petition and a written notice of the time and place of the hearing thereof and any other papers upon which the petition is based shall be served in the manner provided in the arbitration agreement for the service of such petition and notice.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 1290.4, subd. (a).) “If the arbitration agreement does not provide the manner in which such service shall be made and the person upon whom service is to be made has not previously appeared in the proceeding and has not previously been served in accordance with this subdivision:

(1) Service within this State shall be made in the manner provided by law for the service of summons in an action.

(2) Service outside this State shall be made by mailing the copy of the petition and notice and other papers by registered or certified mail. Personal service is the equivalent of such service by mail. Proof of service by mail shall be made by affidavit showing such mailing together with the return receipt of the United States Post Office bearing the signature of the person on whom service was made. Notwithstanding any other provision of this title, if service is made in the manner provided in this paragraph, the petition may not be heard until at least 30 days after the date of such service.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 1290.4, subd. (b).)

In this case, Valverde Mayo’s petition is made pursuant to Insurance Code section 11580.2, subdivision (f) which requires disagreements over uninsured/underinsured motorist coverage to be submitted to arbitration. Because arbitration is not required pursuant to an agreement between the parties, Valverde Mayo is required to serve notice of the present petition in a manner established by Code of Civil Procedure section 1290.4, subdivision (b).) Although Valverde Mayo mailed copies of the present petition and a hearing notice to Aspire at an address in Rancho Cucamonga, Code of Civil Procedure section 1290.4, subdivision (b)(1) only allows service by mail when the respondent is outside of California. Thus, Valverde Mayo must service notice of the present petition and hearing in the same manner authorized for the service of summons in a civil action.

Accordingly, the hearing on Valverde Mayo’s petition is CONTINUED to a date to be determined at the hearing set in Department G (Pomona).