Judge: Upinder S. Kalra, Case: 22STCP01062, Date: 2025-01-08 Tentative Ruling

1. If you wish to submit on the tentative ruling, please email the clerk at SMCdept51@lacourt.org (and “cc” all other parties in the same email) and notify all other parties in advance that you will not be appearing at the hearing.  Include the word "SUBMISSION" in all caps in the subject line and include your name, contact information, the case number, and the party you represent in the body of the email. If you do not have access to the internet, you may call the clerk at (213) 633-0351.

If you submit on the tentative and elect not to appear at the hearing, the opposing party may nevertheless appear and argue the motion, and the Court may decide not to adopt the tentative ruling. Please note that the tentative ruling is not an invitation, nor an opportunity, to file any further documents relative to the hearing in question which are not authorized by statute or Rule of Court.

2. For any motion where no parties submit to the tentative ruling in advance, and no parties appear at the motion hearing, the Court may elect to either adopt the tentative ruling or take the motion off calendar, in its discretion.

3. DO NOT USE THE ABOVE EMAIL FOR ANY PURPOSE OTHER THAN TO SUBMIT TO A TENTATIVE RULING.  The Court will not read or respond to emails sent to this address for any other purpose.

Case Number: 22STCP01062    Hearing Date: January 8, 2025    Dept: 51

Tentative Ruling

Judge Upinder S. Kalra, Department 51

HEARING DATE:   January 8, 2025                                  

CASE NAME:           Vasquez, et al. v. Farmers Insurance Company

CASE NO.:                22STCP01062

PETITION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION

MOVING PARTY:   Petitioners, Mirian Vasquez and Carmen Vasquez

RESPONDING PARTY(S): None as of January 3, 2025

REQUESTED RELIEF:

1.      An Order compelling arbitration of the uninsured/underinsured motorist claim between Petitioners and Respondent;

2.      An Award of costs of this action.

TENTATIVE RULING:

1.      Petition to Compel Arbitration is DENIED without prejudice.

STATEMENT OF MATERIAL FACTS AND/OR PROCEEDINGS:

On March 23, 2022, Petitioners Mirian Vasquez and Carmen Vasquez filed a petition to compel arbitration against Respondent Farmers Insurance Company.

Petitioners contend they are insured under an automobile insurance policy provided by Respondent, which includes coverage for damages caused by an under-insured motorist. Petitioners allege they were involved in an automobile accident on January 20, 2021. Petitioners further allege that their claim on their insurance policy has been resolved for the policy limits and seek damages in excess of the policy limits from Respondent.

On April 29, 2022, Respondent filed a Response to the Petition.

On July 6, 2022, the court DENIED the Petition without prejudice.

On September 3, 2024, Petitioners filed the instant Petition to Compel Uninsured/Underinsured Motorist Arbitration. As of January 3, 2025, the court has not received any response.

LEGAL STANDARD:

Recovery by an insured on an uninsured or underinsured motorist provision (UIM/UM) of an automobile insurance policy is governed by Insurance Code section 11580.2. If the insured and insurer cannot agree as to whether the insured is entitled to benefits under the UIM/UM provision or how much the insured is entitled to, the matter must be decided by arbitration conducted by a single neutral arbitrator. (Ins. Code, § 11580.2, subd. (f).) The discovery methods provided in Title 4 of the Code of Civil Procedure (the Civil Discovery Act) are available to either party, both before and after the commencement of arbitration, and the Superior Court has jurisdiction to adjudicate discovery disputes. (Ins. Code, §§ 11580.2, subds. (f) & (f)(2).)

“No cause of action shall accrue to the insured under any policy or endorsement provision issued pursuant to this section unless one of the following actions have been taken within two years from the date of the accident:

(A) Suit for bodily injury has been filed against the uninsured motorist, in a court of competent jurisdiction.
(B) Agreement as to the amount due under the policy has been concluded.
(C) The insured has formally instituted arbitration proceedings by notifying the insurer in writing sent by certified mail, return receipt requested. Notice shall be sent to the insurer or to the agent for process designated by the insurer filed with the department.”

(Ins. Code, § 11580.2, subd. (i).)

“Any demand or petition for arbitration shall contain a declaration, under penalty of perjury, stating whether (i) the insured has a workers’ compensation claim; (ii) the claim has proceeded to findings and award or settlement on all issues reasonably contemplated to be determined in that claim; and (iii) if not, what reasons amounting to good cause are grounds for the arbitration to proceed immediately.” (Ins. Code § 11580.2, subd. (f).)

“On petition of a party to an arbitration agreement alleging the existence of a written agreement to arbitrate a controversy and that a party to the agreement refuses to arbitrate that controversy, the court shall order the petitioner and the respondent to arbitrate the controversy if it determines that an agreement to arbitrate the controversy exists . . .” (Code Civ. Proc. § 1281.2.)

“[A]n insured’s cause of action against an insurance company to compel arbitration or uninsured motorist benefits does not accrue, and the statute of limitations does not begin to run, until the insurance company refuses to arbitrate.” (Allstate Ins. Co. v. Gonzalez (1995) 38 Cal.App.4th 783, 789 [quoting Spear v. Cal. State Auto. Assn. (1992) 2 Cal.4th 1035, 1043].)

ANALYSIS:

Petitioners contend the court should compel arbitration because they have an uninsured/underinsured motorist policy with respondent, they demanded settlement related to this claim, and Respondent refused to arbitrate. (Helpern Dec. ¶¶ 2, 3, 5, 6.) Petitioners further contend that there is no workers’ compensation claim. (Helpern Dec. ¶ 4.)

A petition to compel arbitration of an uninsured/underinsured motorist claim on an automobile insurance policy is a petition to compel arbitration made pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure (CCP) section 1281.2. (See Gordon v. G.R.O.U.P., Inc. (1996) 49 Cal.App.4th 998, 1005 [noting that arbitration of a claim on an uninsured motorist policy may be compelled to arbitration and citing Code of Civil Procedure section 1281.2].) As such, the court must make a finding that there is a written agreement to arbitrate and that a party to the agreement has refused to do so. (CCP § 1281.2.) Disputes on claims like Petitioners’ are required by law to be arbitrated, but the court must still make a finding that Respondent has refused to arbitrate the dispute in order to grant a petition to compel arbitration. Here, while Petitioners provide evidence that Respondent denied the claim (Helpern Decl., Exhibit B), there is no evidence that Respondent refused to arbitrate. In fact, there is no evidence that Petitioners demanded arbitration. (Helpern Decl., Exhibit A). Rather, the attached exhibit only evidences a demand for settlement.

Accordingly, the court DENIES the Petition to Compel Arbitration without prejudice.[1]

CONCLUSION:

For the foregoing reasons, the court decides the pending motion as follows:

1.      Petition to Compel Arbitration is DENIED without prejudice.

Moving party to give notice.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated:  January 8, 2025                                              ___________________________________

                                                                                    Upinder S. Kalra

                                                                                    Judge of the Superior Court