Split Is Now Present Between The Intermediate Appellate Courts On This Issue. In Keeton v. Tesla, Inc., Case No. A166690 (1st Dist., Div. 1 June 26, 2024) (published), the 1/1 DCA considered whether CCP § 1281.98(a)(1), the 30-day window for employers to pay arbitration expenses, is preempted by the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA). After
Unpublished Solis Decision, From The 2/5 DCA, Follows Reasoning In Recently Published Hernandez Opinion Over A Dissent. On May 24, 2024, we posted on Hernandez v. Sohnen Enterprises, Inc., a May 22, 2024 2/5 DCA opinion which was published, deciding CCP § 1281.97 orders are appealable and § 1281.97 was preempted by the FAA
Dissent Disagrees That FAA Is Offended By Section 1281.97. In Hernandez v. Sohnen Enterprises, Inc., Case No. B323303 (2d Dist., Div. 5 May 22, 2024) (published), a 2-1 panel decided that the FAA preempts the CCP § 1281.97 deadline requiring that an arbitration is forfeited unless the employer pays expenses within 30 days unless
Arbitrator Need To Make Decisions; Party Opposing Arbitration For Lack Of Funds Needs To Make Showing Before Superior Court Or Arbitrator. In Lew-Williams v. Petrosian, Case No. B330387 (2d Dist., Div. 7 Apr. 2, 2024) (published), a trial court dismissed state law claims for failure to prosecute after the matter was ordered to arbitration
Only A Trial Judge Can Order Discovery Sanctions Under Uninsured Motorist Arbitration. We did know that uninsured motorist arbitrations are a niche area for practitioners in the area. That is confirmed by the result in Ourfali v. 21st Century Ins. Co., Case No. B324150 (2d Dist., Div. 4 Mar. 27, 2024) (unpublished). There, in
Deadline Is Strict; § 1287.97 Is Not Preempted By The FAA. In Jane Doe v. Lawyers for Employee and Consumers Rights, Case No. B330052 (2d Dist., Div. 6 Mar. 21, 2024) (unpublished), former employer sought to press arbitration against ex-employee although it paid late arbitration expenses in derogation of the 30-day deadline under CCP
Fifth District Reversed An Order Withdrawing The Case From Arbitration Because Evidence Showed JAMS Invoice Not Received Until Later By Employer. Construing CCP § 1281.98 through plain dictionary meanings, the Fifth District in Lopez v. Landscape Development, Inc., Case No. F085676 (5th Dist. Mar. 7, 2024) (unpublished) reversed an order withdrawing a case from
Dissent Believed That The FAA Preempted Section 1281.98. In Hohenshelt v. Superior Court, Case No. B327524 (2d Dist., Div. 8 Feb. 27, 2024) (published), by a 2-1 margin, the majority determined that employer forfeited the ability to arbitrate by not paying arbitration fees and expenses as required under CCP § 1281.98, even though JAMS
Facts Here Were That Employer Obtained Stay Of Court Case, But Did Not Timely Pay Arbitration Fees. Although the procedural context was a little different because employer obtained an arbitration stay and then failed to timely pay fees for a contractual arbitration against employee, the 4/1 DCA followed the lead of Second District cases
Attorney Did Not Represent Client So As To Practicing In Unauthorized Fashion And Pre-Arbitration Fees Fell Within Broad Arbitration Clause. Arbitration fee awards are hard to overturn, as 1600 Barberry Lane 8 v. Mikles, Case No. D081775 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Jan. 17, 2024) (unpublished) establishes that well, in line with prior posts under
