What is an arbitration agreement?

Useful Rulings on Arbitration Agreement

Recent Rulings on Arbitration Agreement

FRANK ORTEGA VS WHEELS FINANCIAL GROUP, LLC

Rice (1) Defendant’s Motion to Compel Arbitration Moving Party: Defendant Wheels Financial Group, LLC Responding Party: Plaintiff Frank Ortega Ruling: Defendant’s motion to compel arbitration is granted. This action is stayed pending resolution of arbitration. Even where the FAA governs the interpretation of arbitration clauses, California law governs whether an arbitration agreement has been formed in the first instance. (Baker v. Osborne Development Corp. (2008) 159 Cal.App.4th 884, 893.)

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

LAROME BROWNLEE VS PUBLIC STORAGE,A MARYLAND CORPORATION, ET AL.

A petition to compel arbitration is in essence a suit in equity to compel specific performance of a contract. (Id. at 71.) As with any other specific performance claim, “a party seeking to enforce an arbitration agreement must show the agreement’s terms are sufficiently definite to enable the court to know what it is to enforce.” (Ibid. [internal citations omitted].)

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Wrongful Term

JOSEPH GRESSIS VS CORPORATE MANAGEMENT SERVICES, INC.

Because Defendant did not make this showing, the Court granted its motion to compel arbitration pursuant to the CAA, not the FAA. As such, even if the FAA does preempt the CCP sections 1281.98 and 1281.99, the preemption is irrelevant because Defendant never demonstrated that the FAA applies and the Court sent the case to arbitration pursuant to the CAA. 4.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Other Employment

DARIUSH G ADLI, ET AL. VS KEVIN D. FRAZER, ET AL.

Code of Civil Procedure, section 1290.4 states, in pertinent part: “(a) 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.

  • Hearing

NICOLE JENNIFER BASTIDAS VS CITY OF LOS ANGELES, A PUBLIC ENTITY, ET AL.

The arbitration agreement is not overly harsh and does not provide for one-sided results. Rather, it is merely a way in which the parties may resolve a dispute that will, most likely, take less time and money to resolve than litigation in court. The Court finds this action cannot be dismissed because Plaintiff has brought causes of action against parties other than Defendant Neutron.

  • Hearing

DAVENPORT V. GHC OF SANTEE, LLC

Defendants have attached the arbitration agreement dated 6-29-15 and the arbitrator’s Ruling on Motion to Dismiss dated 3-16-20. (The Petition attaches the Ruling on the Motion to Dismiss as 8c.) is Petition which includes a proof of mail service to plaintiff dated March 17, 2020. The Ruling on the Motion to Dismiss includes a proof of service showing service on Jimmie Davenport and Mozelle Davenport. (See Order Granting Attorney’s Motion to be Relieved as Counsel filed on 2-14-17 under ROA No. 45.)

  • Hearing

MH PILLARS LTD VS PAYMENTWORLD LIMITED ET AL

Defendants filed a motion to compel arbitration under the Agreement, which the Court granted. All claims asserted against Defendants were compelled to arbitration. The Current Motion Defendants filed a renewed motion (the “Motion”) to vacate the resulting arbitration award (the “Arbitration Award”). The Motion is made on the grounds that: (1) the arbitrator exceeded his authority by issuing an order pursuant to an illegal contract; and (2) the Arbitration Award was procured by fraud or undue means.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

JUAN CARLOS RODRIGUEZ INDIVIDUALLY AND AS SUCCESSOR IN INTEREST FOR CELIA VAZQUEZ VS. KAISER FOUNDATION HEALTH PLAN INC

Querol") (collectively, "Defendants") to Compel Arbitration and to Stay Action TENTATIVE RULING The Court intends to GRANT Defendants' motion to compel arbitration and to stay the action DISCUSSION I.

  • Hearing

MARIA H. MARTINEZ VS PILGRIM PLACE IN CLAREMONT, A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION

Defendant’s motion to compel arbitration asserted that Defendant distributed an Handbook in 2016 and the Arbitration Agreement here in dispute at a Grounds/Housekeeping Department meeting in 2016; and that employees were given the opportunity to ask questions about both documents and take the documents home for further review before signing. (See Tollefson Decl. ¶ 6.) On reply, Defendant provides a supplemental declaration of Ms. Tollefson attesting that Ms.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Wrongful Term

BRYAN NAVARRO ET AL. VS BARONHR WEST, INC., A CORPORATION ET AL.

BURDEN OF PROVING EXISTENCE OF ARBITRATION AGREEMENT: When presented with a petition to compel arbitration, the court’s first task is to determine whether an agreement exists, and, if any defense to the enforcement is raised, whether it is enforceable. (Espejo, supra, 246 Cal.App.4th at 1057.) The petitioner bears the burden of proving the existence of an agreement to arbitrate by a preponderance of the evidence. (Id.) The FAA does not require a jury trial on the existence of an arbitration agreement.

  • Hearing

  • Judge Jayne Lee
  • County

    San Joaquin County, CA

RUBIO-VIRGEN VS NEKZAD AUTO INC

"The court shall impose a monetary sanction against a drafting party that materially breaches an arbitration agreement ... by ordering the drafting party to pay the reasonable expenses, including attorney's fees and costs, incurred by the employee or consumer as a result of the material breach." Code Civ. Proc. 1281.99(a). The Court notes that the opposition does not dispute or address the number of hours incurred or the hourly rates of counsel.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

ROSE DIPLOMAT LLC VS MARY NELSON ET AL

On June 5, 2019, the Court granted Plaintiff’s motion to compel arbitration, ordered Plaintiff and Defendants to resume arbitration, and stayed the action pending the completion of arbitration. During this time, from January 12, 2018 through October 7, 2019, Shelly Jay Shafron, counsel for Defendants, communicated with Gribin via telephone and email regarding Gribin’s acceptance of the arbitration position and the selection of other arbitrators.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    other

LAYLA PETITT VS T-MOBILE USA, INC., ET AL.

LEGAL STANDARD “On petition of a party to an arbitration agreement alleging the existence of a written agreement to arbitrate a controversy and that a party thereto refuses to arbitrate such 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, unless it determines that: (a) The right to compel arbitration has been waived by the petitioner; or (b) Grounds exist for the revocation of the agreement

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

WILLIAMS V WEST COAST HOSPITALS, INC. DBA VALLEY CONVALESCENT HOSPITAL

MOTION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION The motion is granted. The court finds the existence of a valid Arbitration Agreement executed by Plaintiff Joh Williams in both his personal and representative capacity. Plaintiffs have failed to demonstrat that the Arbitration Agreement is revocable; that it is unconscionable; that it does not bin Plaintiffs John and Paul Williams; or that the court should deny the motion to compel arbitratio due to a risk of inconsistent rulings.

  • Hearing

CHRISTINA CRUZ VS RALPHS GROCERY COMPANY, A OHIO CORPORATION, ET AL.

Rice (1) Defendants’ Motion to Compel Arbitration Moving Party: Defendants Ralph’s Grocery Company, Food 4 Less of California, Inc., Food 4 Less of Southern California, Inc, and The Kroger Co. Responding Party: Plaintiff Christina Cruz Ruling: Defendants’ motion to compel arbitration is granted. This action is stayed pending resolution of arbitration.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Wrongful Term

FIDELITY NATIONAL TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY V. HOROWITZ

Gold’s declaration filed in support of the Motion to Compel Arbitration (filed on 4-19-19 under ROA No. 79) specifically refers to “. . . the voiding of certain transfers . . .” in the Demand for Arbitration. Petitioner also contends that the Arbitration Award is somehow defective because it imposed a constructive trust on the transferred interest. (Petition; 9-9-10:3.) Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. v.

  • Hearing

COLOREDGE, INC., A DELAWARE CORPORATION, VS EDIE GELARDI, AN INDIVIDUAL,, ET AL.

Plaintiff argues that the only signatories to the Arbitration Agreement are Gelardi and Merisel, and that there is no arbitration agreement in place between Plaintiff and Duggal, and so Duggal cannot enforce the Arbitration Agreement against Plaintiff. In reply, Duggal Defendants contend that Duggal is an intended third party beneficiary of the Arbitration Agreement, equitable estoppel compels arbitration of the claims against Duggal, and agency/alter Ego doctrines compel arbitration.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Business

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

HEDLAND VS. TESLA, INC

Motion to Compel Arbitration Tentative Ruling: Defendants’, Tesla, Inc., Tesla Motors, Inc. and Suzie Hatzis, Motion to Compel Arbitration and Stay Action is GRANTED. Under either the Federal Arbitration Act or the California Arbitration Act, defendants must show the parties have a written agreement to arbitrate. (9 USCA §2; Code Civ. Proc., §1281.2.) Moving Party has shown the existence of an agreement to arbitrate here. (Motion, Shin Declaration, Exh. 1.)

  • Hearing

TAMIKO BROWNLEE VS MISSION CONTROL MEDIA INC ET AL

Course of Proceedings In October 2015, the Court granted a motion to compel arbitration brought by Mission and Syfy. In March 2016, the Court granted motions to compel arbitration brought by T-Minus, Hollywoodstuntcoordinator.com, White, Ceglia, and Fexco. The Court stayed the case with respect to Alvand. In December 2019, the Court granted Plaintiff’s petition to vacate the arbitration award in favor of Fexco and against Plaintiff. Fexco has appealed this ruling.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

YADIRA VELASQUEZ VS NORTHGATE GONZALEZ MARKETS, INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, ET AL.

The Court finds that Defendants have not met their burden to demonstrate that a valid arbitration agreement exists between the parties. (Code Civ. Proc., § 1281.2.) The Court DENIES Defendants’ motion to compel arbitration. II.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Wrongful Term

PADILLA VS. PRECISION HOSPITALITY & DEVELOPMENT, LLC

Defendant’s Motion to Compel Arbitration, Strike Class Claims, and to Stay PAGA Claim Pending Completion of Arbitration is denied as moot. On November 6, 2020, the court granted plaintiff’s request to dismiss both her individual claims and class claims without prejudice. All that remains are plaintiff’s PAGA claims, which are not subject to arbitration, as defendant concedes. Plaintiff is ordered to give notice of the ruling unless notice is waived.

  • Hearing

CHARLENE TANG VS 829 FLOWER, LLC , ET AL.

Scope of Arbitration Clause “It is well established that a court will not grant a petition to compel arbitration filed pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 1281.2 if the subject matter to be arbitrated is not within the scope of the arbitration agreement. [Citation.] Generally, a court will look to the arbitration agreement itself to determine its scope.” (United Teachers of Los Angeles v. Los Angeles Unified School Dist. (2012) 54 Cal.4th 504, 516.)

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    other

  • Judge Elaine Lu
  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

NOYEMI KAROYAN, AN INDIVIDUAL VS HYUNDAI OF GLENDALE, LLC A BUSINESS ENTITY EXACT FORM UNKNOWN, ET AL.

Thus, Defendants have not waived the right to enforce arbitration pursuant to the arbitration agreement. The Court GRANTS Defendants’ motion to compel arbitration. II.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Other Employment

YADIRA VELASQUEZ VS NORTHGATE GONZALEZ MARKETS, INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, ET AL.

The Court finds that Defendants have not met their burden to demonstrate that a valid arbitration agreement exists between the parties. (Code Civ. Proc., § 1281.2.) The Court DENIES Defendants’ motion to compel arbitration. II.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Wrongful Term

MANUEL C. CORTES, IV VS BMW NORTH AMERICA, LLC, ET AL.

BMW NA’s motion to compel arbitration and motion for a stay is GRANTED.

  • Hearing

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 377     last » 

For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.

Please wait a moment while we load this page.