PRETRIAL ADJUDICATION
...Contract Arbitration
......Compelling Arbitration
.........Ruling on Motion
 28 Cards On This Topic:
  • If agreement to arbitrate found, arbitration must be ordered unless ct. finds specified bases for denial.
  • Court may not refuse arbitration on basis that petitioner's contentions lack substantive merit.
  • A statement of decision may be requested if arbitration is denied.
  • EEOC not entitled to injunction forbidding employer from requiring that employees sign arbitration agreements as condition of employment; Duffield overruled.
  • Decision in Luce, Forward III was not an intervening change in law allowing employer to bring a "renewed petition to compel arbitration": "There is no such animal" in FRCP.
  • Trial court has discretion to refuse to enforce predispute agreement providing that, in the event of dispute, a referee may hear and decide certain contested issues.
  • Because contract arbitration proceeding doesn't result in favorable termination of prior action, a necessary element of malicious prosecution, person may not sue for malicious prosecution of action resolved through contract arbitration.
  • Employees may be compelled to arbitrate anti-discrimination claims if arbitration permits employee to vindicate statutory rights and meets certain minimum requirements.
  • In ruling on enforceability of arbitration clause, especially where fraud involved, trial court should hear oral testimony and allow parties opportunity for cross-exam.
  • Resolution of factual disputes concerning enforcement of arbitration agreement to be resolved pursuant to Rosenthal v. Great Western Fin. Securities Corp.
  • Error to deny evid. hearing where Ps never had the opportunity to prove arbitration agreements were not provided to them, and that there was no valid incorporation of them into contracts.
  • Error to deny Ds' petition to arbitrate where all Ds were either parties to the action, party's agents, or associates of a party, under FINRA or any other arbitral forum.
  • Order denying petition to compel reversed where court failed to issue SOD; petition to compel heard in manner of motion but with trial components; court to consider possibility of inconsistent rulings per CCP 1281.2(c).
  • Given arbitration agrmt’s multiple unlawful provisions, no abuse of discretion in determining agrmt "permeated with unconscionability" and not enforceable.
  • In action to compel arbitration of K disputes, party who obtains order denying petition to compel is prevailing party on K though merits not resolved; order denying costs and fees appealable as special order after final judgment.
  • Trial court properly denied contractor's petition to compel arbitration where other party to agreement was in pending court case with 3d parties and there was possibility of conflicting rulings on common issues of law or fact.
  • While trial court did not err in vacating later disqualified judge's order compelling arbitration, it was premature to vacate the arbitration award itself.
  • Trial court required to hold evidentiary hearing before, not after, ruling on motion to compel arbitration.
  • Petition to compel arb should not have been denied as barred by statute—CCP 1281.2 forbids courts from denying arbitration on ground pet.'s claim meritless; arbitrators may interpret statutes.
  • Absent evidence of fraud in the inception or execution of parties' arbitration agreements, trial court was required to grant D's motion to compel arbitration.
  • Order compelling arbitration must be vacated where insurer already paid UM policy limits to insured and arbitrating amount of damages she was entitled to was no longer relevant or in controversy.
  • Motion to compel should have been granted where no extrinsic evidence of procedural unconscionability, and none inferable from agreement or relationship between RV dealer and customer.
  • Agreement binding P to arbitrate employment dispute was enforceable with exception of severable appeal section; D required to pay arbitrator's costs.
  • Arbitration provisions in seniors’ reverse mortgage agreement and DOT procedurally and substantively unconscionable and unenforceable under Armendariz.
  • Trial court, having granted Ds’ motion to compel arbitration, had no jurisdiction to hear or rule on their motion to dismiss, which should have been addressed to the arbitrator.
  • P can’t be compelled to arbitrate simply because he is president of another corporation that had a licensing agreement providing for arbitration with D corp.
  • Trial court properly denied Ds' motion to compel arbitration where arbitration agreement so one-sided it should not be enforced.
  • Insurer may compel arbitration for violation of Unruh Civil Rights Act.


    •