Judge: Theresa M. Traber, Case: 22STCV17234, Date: 2022-11-21 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22STCV17234    Hearing Date: November 21, 2022    Dept: 47

Tentative Ruling

Judge Theresa M. Traber, Department 47

HEARING DATE:     November 21, 2022               TRIAL DATE: NOT SET

CASE:                         Montana Marketing & Sales, Inc. v. Jose Sanchez

CASE NO.:                 22STCV17234           

MOTION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION AND STAY PROCEEDINGS

MOVING PARTY:               Plaintiff Montana Marketing & Sales, Inc.,

RESPONDING PARTY(S): No response on eCourt as of 11/17/22

STATEMENT OF MATERIAL FACTS AND/OR PROCEEDINGS:

            This is an action for breach of contract that was filed on May 25, 2022. Plaintiff alleges that the parties entered into a series of construction contracts for improvements on a parcel of real property, which contracts Defendant allegedly breached by failing to pay Plaintiff for services rendered.

Plaintiff moves to compel this matter to arbitration and to stay this action

TENTATIVE RULING:

            Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Arbitration is DENIED.

DISCUSSION:

Under California law, arbitration agreements are valid, irrevocable, and enforceable, save upon such grounds as exist at law or in equity for the revocation of any contract. (Blake v. Ecker (2001) 93 Cal.App.4th 728, 741 (overruled on other grounds by Le Francois v. Goel (2005) 35 Cal.4th 1094).) A party petitioning to compel arbitration has the burden of establishing the existence of a valid agreement to arbitrate, and the party opposing the petition has the burden of proving, by a preponderance of the evidence, any fact necessary to its defense. (Banner Entertainment, Inc. v. Superior Court (1998) 62 Cal.App.4th 348, 356-57.)

            Plaintiff has produced the arbitration agreement which it contends is the operative agreement in this matter. However, Plaintiff has failed to provide any statement authenticating this document. (Motion Exh. A.) Without authentication, the Court cannot consider this document. (See Evid. Code § 1401.) Furthermore, the purported agreement bears the signature and initials of an individual only named as “Tommy” or T.D, with no explanation of this individual’s relationship to Plaintiff. (See generally Exh. A.) Thus, even if the Court were able to consider the document, Plaintiff has not established that it, or its agent acting on its behalf, signed the arbitration agreement and consented to its terms. Plaintiff has therefore failed to establish the existence of a valid agreement to arbitrate. 

CONCLUSION:

            Accordingly, Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Arbitration is DENIED.

            Moving Party to give notice.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated:  November 21, 2022                            ___________________________________

                                                                                    Theresa M. Traber

                                                                                    Judge of the Superior Court

            Any party may submit on the tentative ruling by contacting the courtroom via email at Smcdept47@lacourt.org by no later than 4:00 p.m. the day before the hearing. All interested parties must be copied on the email. It should be noted that if you submit on a tentative ruling the court will still conduct a hearing if any party appears. By submitting on the tentative you have, in essence, waived your right to be present at the hearing, and you should be aware that the court may not adopt the tentative, and may issue an order which modifies the tentative ruling in whole or in part.