Judge Teresa A. Beaudet, Case Number: 23STCV31222, Date: 2024-08-15 Tentative Ruling

MARGIT STEVENS, et al.

Plaintiffs,

vs.

BLUE CROSS OF CALIFORNIA DBA ANTHEM BLUE CROSS, et al.

Defendants.

Case No.:

23STCV31222

Hearing Date:

August 15, 2024

Hearing Time: 10:00 a.m.

[TENTATIVE] ORDER RE:

DEFENDANTS’ PETITION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION AND STAY TRIAL COURT PROCEEDINGS

Plaintiffs Margit Stevens and Nathaniel Stevens (jointly, “Plaintiffs”) filed this action on December 21, 2023 against Defendants Blue Cross of California dba Anthem Blue Cross and Anthem Life and Health Insurance Company.

Plaintiffs filed the operative First Amended Complaint on December 28, 2023, alleging causes of action for (1) negligence and (2) promissory fraud.

Blue Cross of California dba Anthem Blue Cross and Anthem Blue Cross Life and Health Insurance Company (erroneously sued as Anthem Life and Health Insurance Company) (jointly, “Defendants”) now petition the Court for an order: (1) compelling Plaintiffs to submit their claims against Defendants to binding arbitration and (2) staying trial court proceedings pending a ruling on the petition and until the arbitration is concluded. Plaintiffs oppose.

As an initial matter, in support of the opposition, Plaintiffs submit the Declaration of Adrian J. Barrio. Exhibit 2 to Mr. Barrio’s declaration is redacted. (Barrio Decl., ¶ 5, Ex. 2.)

Plaintiffs filed a notice of lodging with the opposition indicating that “Plaintiffs Ryan Williford and Tangi Williford[1] have lodged with the Court the following unredacted document designated by Defendants as confidential: 1. Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 2: Administrative Services Agreement between Anthem and CVT. DEFENDANTS ARE HEREBY NOTICED that if they fail to file a motion or an application to seal the record within 10 days or obtain a court order extending the time to file such a motion or application, the Clerk will promptly transfer the lodged document to the public file pursuant to Rule 2.551 of the California Rules of Court. The lodged document will remain conditionally under seal until the Court rules on a motion or application or as otherwise ordered by the Court.” (Plaintiffs’ Notice of Lodging at p. 1:2-12.)

(A) A party that files or intends to file with the court, for the purposes of adjudication or to use at trial, records produced in discovery that are subject to a confidentiality agreement or protective order, and does not intend to request to have the records sealed, must:

(i) Lodge the unredacted records subject to the confidentiality agreement or protective order and any pleadings, memorandums, declarations, and other documents that disclose the contents of the records, in the manner stated in (d);

(ii) File copies of the documents in (i) that are redacted so that they do not disclose the contents of the records that are subject to the confidentiality agreement or protective order; and

(iii) Give written notice to the party that produced the records that the records and the other documents lodged under (i) will be placed in the public court file unless that party files a timely motion or application to seal the records under this rule.

(B) If the party that produced the documents and was served with the notice under (A)(iii) fails to file a motion or an application to seal the records within 10 days or to obtain a court order extending the time to file such a motion or an application, the clerk must promptly transfer all the documents in (A)(i) from the envelope, container, or secure electronic file to the public file. If the party files a motion or an application to seal within 10 days or such later time as the court has ordered, these documents are to remain conditionally under seal until the court rules on the motion or application and thereafter are to be filed as ordered by the court.” (Emphasis added.)

As set forth above, California Rules of Court, rule 2.551, subdivision (b)(3) applies to “[a] party that files or intends to file with the court, for the purposes of adjudication or to use at trial, records produced in discovery that are subject to a confidentiality agreement or protective order…” (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 2.551, subd. (b)(3)(A).) Plaintiffs do not appear to provide any evidence that Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 2 is subject to a confidentiality agreement or protective order.

Based on the foregoing, the Court does not find that California Rules of Court, rule 2.551, subdivision (b)(3) is applicable here. Pursuant to California Rules of Court, rule 2.551, subdivision (a), “[a] record must not be filed under seal without a court order. The court must not permit a record to be filed under seal based solely on the agreement or stipulation of the parties.” In addition, “[a] party requesting that a record be filed under seal must file a motion or an application for an order sealing the record. The motion or application must be accompanied by a memorandum and a declaration containing facts sufficient to justify the sealing.” (Cal. Rules of Court, Rule 2.551, subd. (b)(2).)

In light of the foregoing, the hearing on Defendants’ petition to compel arbitration and stay trial court proceedings is continued to ____________, 2024, at 10:00 a.m. in Dept. 50. If Plaintiffs seek to seal the subject Exhibit 2, Plaintiffs must immediately file a motion or application to seal pursuant to California Rules of Court, rule 2.550, et seq.¿If Plaintiffs do not seek to seal the subject document, Plaintiffs must immediately file with the Court an unredacted version of Exhibit 2.

[1]The reference to “Plaintiffs Ryan Williford and Tangi Williford” appears to be a typo.

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles

Department 50