AUTHOR*
Phyllis W. Cheng
Basith v. Lithia Motors, Inc., 90 Cal. App. 5th 951 (2023); review granted, 2023 WL 5114947 (Aug. 9, 2023); S280258/B316098
The petition for review is granted. Further action in this matter is deferred pending consideration and disposition of a related issue in Fuentes v. Empire Nissan, Inc., S280256/B314490 (see Cal. Rules of Ct., rule 8.512(d)(2)), or pending further order of the court. Submission of additional briefing, pursuant to Cal. Rules of Ct., rule 8.520, is deferred pending further order of the court.
Holding for the lead case.
Fuentes v. Empire Nissan, 90 Cal. App. 5th 919 (2023), review granted, 2023 WL 5114942 (Aug. 9, 2023); S280256/B314490
Petition for review after reversal of order denying a petition to compel arbitration. Is the form arbitration agreement that the employer here required prospective employees to sign as a condition of employment unenforceable against an employee due to unconscionability?
Fully briefed.
Hohenshelt v. Superior Court, 99 Cal. App. 5th 1319 (2024), review granted, 321 Cal. Rptr. 3d 633 (Mem) (June 12, 2024); S284498/B327524
Petition for review after the grant of petition for writ of mandate. Does the Federal Arbitration Act (9 U.S.C. § 1 et seq.) preempt state statutes prescribing the procedures for paying arbitration fees and providing for forfeiture of the right to arbitrate if timely payment is not made by the party who drafted the arbitration agreement and who is required to pay such fees?
Review granted/brief due.
Zhang v. Superior Court, 85 Cal. App. 5th 167 (2022); review granted, 304 Cal. Rptr. 3d 549 (Mem) (Feb. 15, 2023); S277736/B314386
Petition for review after denial of petition for writ of mandate.
- If an employer files a motion to compel arbitration in a non-California forum pursuant to a contractual forum selection clause, and an employee raises as a defense CAL. LAB. CODE § 925, which prohibits an employer from requiring a California employee to agree to a provision requiring the employee to adjudicate outside of California a claim arising in California, is the court in the non-California forum one of "competent jurisdiction" (CAL. CODE CIV. PROC. § 1281.4) such that the motion to compel requires a mandatory stay of the California proceedings?
- Does the presence of a delegation clause in an employment contract delegating issues of arbitrability to an arbitrator prohibit a California court from enforcing CAL. LAB. CODE § 925 in opposition to the employer's stay motion?
Fully briefed.
Ventura County Employees' Retirement Ass'n v. Criminal Justice Attorneys Ass'n of Ventura County, 98 Cal. App. 5th 1119 (2024), review granted, 320 Cal. Rptr. 3d 117 (Mem) (Apr. 17, 2024); S283978/B325277
Petition for review after affirmance of judgment. For purposes of calculating
[Page 26]
retirement benefits for members of County Employees Retirement Law of 1937 (CAL. GOV'T CODE § 31450 et seq.) retirement systems, does CAL. GOV'T CODE § 31461(b)(2) exclude payments for accrued, but unused hours of annual leave that would exceed the maximum amount of leave that was earnable and payable in a calendar year?
Answer brief due.
Accurso v. In-N-Out Burgers (Piplack), 94 Cal. App. 5th 1128 (2023), review granted, 2023 WL 8264179 (Mem) (Nov. 29, 2023); S282173/A165320
Review granted after vacating order denying intervention. Further action in this matter is...
