Skip to Content (Press Enter)

Skip to Nav (Press Enter)

Arbitration

Subscribe to California Appellate Tracker

Thank you for your desire to subscribe to Severson & Werson’s Appellate Tracker Weblog. In order to subscribe, you must provide a valid name and e-mail address. This too will be retained on our server. When you push the “subscribe button”, we will send an electronic mail to the address that you provided asking you to confirm your subscription to our Weblog. By pushing the “subscribe button”, you represent and warrant that you are over the age of 18 years old, are the owner/authorized user of that e-mail address, and are entitled to receive e-mails at that address. Our weblog will retain your name and e-mail address on its server, or the server of its web host. However, we won’t share any of this information with anyone except the Firm’s employees and contractors, except under certain extraordinary circumstances described on our Privacy Policy and (About The Consumer Finance Blog/About the Appellate Tracker Weblog) Page. NOTICE AND AGREEMENT REGARDING E-MAILS AND CALLS/TEXT MESSAGES TO LAND-LINE AND WIRELESS TELEPHONES: By providing your contact information and confirming your subscription in response to the initial e-mail that we send you, you agree to receive e-mail messages from Severson & Werson from time-to-time and understand and agree that such messages are or may be sent by means of automated dialing technology. If you have your email forwarded to other electronic media, including text messages and cellular telephone by way of VoIP, internet, social media, or otherwise, you agree to receive my messages in that way. This may result in charges to you. Your agreement and consent also extend to any other agents, affiliates, or entities to whom our communications are forwarded. You agree that you will notify Severson & Werson in writing if you revoke this agreement and that your revocation will not be effective until you notify Severson & Werson in writing. You understand and agree that you will afford Severson & Werson a reasonable time to unsubscribe you from the website, that the ability to do so depends on Severson & Werson’s press of business and access to the weblog, and that you may still receive one or more emails or communications from weblog until we are able to unsubscribe you.

The district court erred in holding that the delegation clause in the arbitration agreement in this case was unconscionable and therefore unenforceable.  The district court so ruled because the arbitration agreement also provided that if, for any reason, the dispute was not arbitrated, the parties waived a jury trial.  Such a pre-dispute waiver of jury trial is unenforceable under California… Read More

When a plaintiff has brought a PAGA action comprising individual (i.e., violations affecting the plaintiffs) and non-individual (violations affecting only other employees) claims, an order compelling arbitration of the individual claims does not strip the plaintiff of standing as an aggrieved employee to litigate the non-individual claims on behalf of other employees under PAGA. Read More

Defendant employer did not pay its arbitration fees within 30 days after their due date.  Under CCP 1287.98, plaintiff therefore had and exercised the right to withdraw his claim from arbitration and pursue it in court.  The arbitrator or arbitration administrator had no power to avoid the effect of defendant's nonpayment by extending the due date after defendant's default.  Also,… Read More

This decision holds that a party seeking to vacate an arbitration award must file a petition to vacate or a response (seeking vacatur) to a petition to confirm an arbitration award within 100 days of service of the arbitration award.  (CCP 1288, 1288.2.)  A response seeking to vacate is untimely if filed beyond that 100 day limit even if filed… Read More

An employer's arbitration agreement contained a carve-out provision stating that claims under PAGA are not arbitrable under this agreement.  This decision holds that the plain language of the carve-out excludes from arbitration all PAGA claims--including those individual PAGA claims that Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana (2022) 142 S.Ct. 1906 are arbitrable (absent the parties' contrary agreement). Hence, the trial… Read More

Under McGill v. Citibank, N.A. (2017) 2 Cal.5th 945, the trial court properly denied defendant's motion to compel arbitration because the arbitration clause forbade award of a public injunction in any forum.  Contrary to the defendant's argument, its arbitration agreement did not authorize the arbitrator to award a public injunction.  It provided instead that arbitration is to be “conducted only… Read More

Following Ajamian v. CantorCO2e, LP (2012) 203 Cal.App.4th 771, this decision holds that an arbitration agreement does not clearly and unambiguously delegate arbitrability questions to the arbitrator if the otherwise clear, broad delegation clause is contradicted by a severance provision that recognizes the possibility that a court may determine the arbitration clause or a part of it to be unenforceable. … Read More

Under CCP 1281.91 and the Ethical Standards for Neutral Arbitrators, an arbitrator must disclose pending and prior arbitrations (during the previous 5 years) involving the parties to a dispute referred to him.  The arbitrator must also disclose the results in the prior cases.  However, this decision holds that the arbitrator need not disclose the results in pending cases as those… Read More

In this case, plaintiff obtained a UIM arbitration award for the entire $1 million umbrella policy limit due to emotional distress plaintiff suffered from seeing the underinsured motorist hit her mother who was crossing the street with her.  Before the arbitration award, plaintiff made a 998 offer for a penny less than the umbrella policy limits, which the insurer refused. … Read More

Disagreeing with Davis v. TWC Dealer Group, Inc. (2019) 41 Cal.App.5th 662, this decision holding that the arbitration provision in Nissan dealerships' standard employment agreement is not unconscionable.  Though having a high degree of procedural unconscionability due to small print size and lengthy, obscure language, the clause is not substantively unconscionable.  Small print size and obtuse phrasing relate to procedural… Read More

The district court correctly denied Amazon's motion to compel arbitration of a claim by its Flex drivers that Amazon violated state and federal privacy laws by monitoring and wiretapping the drivers’ conversations when they communicated during off hours in closed Facebook groups.  To be arbitrable under Amazon's terms of service, the claim had to arise from or involve the Flex… Read More

Under CCP 1281.9(a)(2), a neutral arbitrator must make disclosures to the parties to an arbitration as required by the Ethics Standards for Neutral Arbitrators in Contractual Arbitration.  Here, the arbitrator did so, and also disclosed that he would accept employment in other disputes as an arbitrator without informing the parties.  In a non-consumer arbitration, the arbitrator is allowed to make… Read More

Although the FAA (9 USC 3) appears to require a district court to stay pending court proceedings when it compels arbitration, binding 9th Circuit precedent holds that, instead, a district court may dismiss the litigation if it compels arbitration of all claims raised in the case.  See Johnmohammadi v. Bloomingdale’s,Inc., 755 F.3d 1072, 1074 (9th Cir. 2014).  The two-judge concurrence… Read More

Following Roldan v. Callahan & Blaine (2013) 219 Cal.App.4th 87, this decision affirms an order denying arbitration after the defendant refused to pay all arbitration costs.  Substantial evidence supported the trial court's finding that Daniel Hang was indigent when he died while in defendant's care.  His son brought suit for elder abuse and negligent hiring and supervision as Hang's successor-in-interest. … Read More

Reaching the same result as Galarsa v. Dolgen California, LLC (2023) 2023 Cal. App. LEXIS 129, this decision holds that plaintiff's individual PAGA claims (i.e., those which are based on Lab. Code violations affecting the plaintiff) must be arbitrated.  However, representative PAGA claims based on Lab. Code violations affecting only employees other than the plaintiff are not subject to arbitration,… Read More

1 2 3 4 16