Judge: William A. Crowfoot, Case: 22STCV17323, Date: 2022-08-10 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22STCV17323    Hearing Date: August 10, 2022    Dept: 27

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

On May 25, 2022, claimant Houshang Tojarieh (“Claimant”) filed this petition to open a civil case and assign a case number to an underinsured motorist arbitration against respondent Geico Insurance Company (“Geico”).  On June 9, 2022, Claimant filed a motion to compel arbitration, but it was never heard.  About a month later, on July 11, 2022, Geico filed this motion to compel arbitration, claiming that Claimant has refused to proceed with arbitration.  In opposition, Claimant contends that the arbitration should move forward if the parties can choose a neutral arbitrator who is not associated with the American Arbitration Association (“AAA”) or, if arbitrators must be provided by AAA, that any arbitrators from AAA “cannot be defense-oriented,” must “be evenly divided in defense/plaintiff orientation, or be full time arbitrators”, and “must not be employed by or do business with Defendant.”  (Opp., 2:10-17.) 

Code of Civil Procedure section 1281.6 provides: If the arbitration agreement provides a method of appointing an arbitrator, that method shall be followed.  In the absence of an agreed method, or if the agreed method fails, the court, on petition of a party to the arbitration agreement, shall appoint the arbitrator.  When a petition is made to the court to appoint a neutral arbitrator, the court shall nominate five persons from lists of persons supplied jointly by the parties to the arbitration and the parties may, within five days of receipt of notice of the nominees from the court, jointly select the arbitrator whether or not the arbitrator is among the nominees.  If the parties fail to select an arbitrator within the five-day period, the court shall appoint the arbitrator from the nominees.  (Code of Civ. Proc., § 1281.6.) 

The relevant text states: “The matter(s) in dispute shall then be settled according to American Arbitration Association rules. One neutral arbitrator will conduct the arbitration.”  (Motion, DaSilva Decl., Ex. A, p. 43.)   Geico claims that the AAA rules delegates the duty to select an individual arbitrator to AAA.  In opposition, Claimant contends that the arbitration agreement does not provide a method for selecting an arbitrator and only requires that the arbitration be conducted according to AAA’s rules.  The AAA rules provide that arbitrators shall be appointed from a national roster if the parties have not appointed an arbitrator and have not agreed to a process for doing so.  (Motion, DaSilva Decl., Ex. B, p. 17, rules 15-16.) 

The Court agrees with Geico.  The AAA rules are incorporated into the Arbitration Agreement, and the AAA rules provide for a method of appointing the arbitrator in this particular situation where the parties have not agreed to process for choosing an arbitrator.  Claimant’s worries should be ameliorated by the disclosures required by AAA of each arbitrator.  (Motion, DaSilva Decl., Ex. B, Rule 18; Reply, DaSilva Decl., Ex. D.) 

Accordingly, Geico’s petition to compel arbitration is GRANTED. 

Moving party to give notice.

Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the Court at SSCDEPT27@lacourt.org indicating intention to submit on the tentative as directed by the instructions provided on the court website at www.lacourt.org.  Please be advised that if you submit on the tentative and elect not to appear at the hearing, the opposing party may nevertheless appear at the hearing and argue the matter.  Unless you receive a submission from all other parties in the matter, you should assume that others might appear at the hearing to argue.  If the Court does not receive emails from the parties indicating submission on this tentative ruling and there are no appearances at the hearing, the Court may, at its discretion, adopt the tentative as the final order or place the motion off calendar.