This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 07/17/2020 at 03:53:45 (UTC).

ERNESTO CASTILLO-DIAZ VS IN-HOUSE AUTO FINANCE, INC., ET AL.

Case Summary

On 09/03/2019 ERNESTO CASTILLO-DIAZ filed a Contract - Other Contract lawsuit against IN-HOUSE AUTO FINANCE, INC . This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Spring Street Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judge overseeing this case is JAMES E. BLANCARTE. The case status is Pending - Other Pending.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    *******8097

  • Filing Date:

    09/03/2019

  • Case Status:

    Pending - Other Pending

  • Case Type:

    Contract - Other Contract

  • Court:

    Los Angeles County Superior Courts

  • Courthouse:

    Spring Street Courthouse

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

Judge

JAMES E. BLANCARTE

 

Party Details

Plaintiff

CASTILLO-DIAZ ERNESTO

Defendants

IN-HOUSE AUTO FINANCE INC.

AUTOMOTIVE CREDIT CORPORATION

HUDSON INSURANCE COMPANY

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff Attorney

SADR KASRA

Defendant Attorney

GASCOU CHRISTIAN JEAN

 

Court Documents

Minute Order - Minute Order (Hearing on Motion to Compel Motion to Compel Arbitration)

11/14/2019: Minute Order - Minute Order (Hearing on Motion to Compel Motion to Compel Arbitration)

Answer - Answer

10/18/2019: Answer - Answer

Proof of Personal Service - Proof of Personal Service

10/22/2019: Proof of Personal Service - Proof of Personal Service

Proof of Personal Service - Proof of Personal Service

10/22/2019: Proof of Personal Service - Proof of Personal Service

Proof of Personal Service - Proof of Personal Service

10/22/2019: Proof of Personal Service - Proof of Personal Service

Declaration (name extension) - Declaration DECLARATION OF NIMA HEYDARI IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS PETITION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION

9/19/2019: Declaration (name extension) - Declaration DECLARATION OF NIMA HEYDARI IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS PETITION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION

Motion to Compel Arbitration - Motion to Compel Arbitration

9/19/2019: Motion to Compel Arbitration - Motion to Compel Arbitration

Affidavit (name extension) - Affidavit Affidavit Re Venue

9/10/2019: Affidavit (name extension) - Affidavit Affidavit Re Venue

Complaint - Complaint

9/3/2019: Complaint - Complaint

Summons - Summons on Complaint

9/3/2019: Summons - Summons on Complaint

Civil Case Cover Sheet - Civil Case Cover Sheet

9/3/2019: Civil Case Cover Sheet - Civil Case Cover Sheet

First Amended Standing Order - First Amended Standing Order

9/3/2019: First Amended Standing Order - First Amended Standing Order

Notice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case - Notice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case

9/3/2019: Notice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case - Notice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case

1 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 09/06/2022
  • Hearing09/06/2022 at 08:30 AM in Department 25 at 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Order to Show Cause Re: Failure to File Proof of Service

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/02/2021
  • Hearing03/02/2021 at 08:30 AM in Department 25 at 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Non-Jury Trial

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/14/2019
  • DocketUpdated -- Motion to Compel Arbitration: Filed By: Ernesto Castillo-Diaz (Plaintiff); Result: Granted; Result Date: 11/14/2019

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/14/2019
  • DocketMinute Order (Hearing on Motion to Compel Motion to Compel Arbitration)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/14/2019
  • DocketHearing on Motion to Compel Motion to Compel Arbitration scheduled for 11/14/2019 at 10:30 AM in Stanley Mosk Courthouse at Department 94 updated: Result Date to 11/14/2019; Result Type to Held - Motion Granted

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/22/2019
  • DocketProof of Personal Service; Filed by: Ernesto Castillo-Diaz (Plaintiff); As to: Automotive Credit Corporation (Defendant); Service Date: 09/23/2019; Service Cost: 40.00; Service Cost Waived: No

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/22/2019
  • DocketProof of Personal Service; Filed by: Ernesto Castillo-Diaz (Plaintiff); As to: In-House Auto Finance, Inc. (Defendant); Service Date: 09/24/2019; Service Cost: 75.00; Service Cost Waived: No

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/22/2019
  • DocketProof of Personal Service; Filed by: Ernesto Castillo-Diaz (Plaintiff); As to: Hudson Insurance Company (Defendant); Service Date: 09/23/2019; Service Cost: 40.00; Service Cost Waived: No

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/18/2019
  • DocketAnswer; Filed by: Hudson Insurance Company (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/19/2019
  • DocketMotion to Compel Arbitration; Filed by: Ernesto Castillo-Diaz (Plaintiff); As to: In-House Auto Finance, Inc. (Defendant); Automotive Credit Corporation (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
1 More Docket Entries
  • 09/19/2019
  • DocketHearing on Motion to Compel Motion to Compel Arbitration scheduled for 11/14/2019 at 10:30 AM in Stanley Mosk Courthouse at Department 94

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/10/2019
  • DocketAffidavit Affidavit Re Venue; Filed by: Ernesto Castillo-Diaz (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/04/2019
  • DocketNon-Jury Trial scheduled for 03/02/2021 at 08:30 AM in Stanley Mosk Courthouse at Department 94

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/04/2019
  • DocketOrder to Show Cause Re: Failure to File Proof of Service scheduled for 09/06/2022 at 08:30 AM in Stanley Mosk Courthouse at Department 94

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/04/2019
  • DocketCase assigned to Hon. James E. Blancarte in Department 94 Stanley Mosk Courthouse

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/03/2019
  • DocketComplaint; Filed by: Ernesto Castillo-Diaz (Plaintiff); As to: In-House Auto Finance, Inc. (Defendant); Automotive Credit Corporation (Defendant); Hudson Insurance Company (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/03/2019
  • DocketSummons on Complaint; Issued and Filed by: Ernesto Castillo-Diaz (Plaintiff); As to: In-House Auto Finance, Inc. (Defendant); Automotive Credit Corporation (Defendant); Hudson Insurance Company (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/03/2019
  • DocketCivil Case Cover Sheet; Filed by: Ernesto Castillo-Diaz (Plaintiff); As to: In-House Auto Finance, Inc. (Defendant); Automotive Credit Corporation (Defendant); Hudson Insurance Company (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/03/2019
  • DocketNotice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case; Filed by: Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/03/2019
  • DocketFirst Amended Standing Order; Filed by: Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: 19STLC08097    Hearing Date: November 14, 2019    Dept: 94

MOTION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION AND STAY PROCEEDINGS

(CCP §§ 1281.2, et seq., 638)

TENTATIVE RULING:

Plaintiff Ernesto Castillo-Diaz’s Motion to Compel Arbitration and Request for Costs is GRANTED. THE MATTER IS TO BE ARBITRATED BEFORE THE AAA AND DEFENDANTS IN-HOUSE AUTO FINANCE, INC. AND AUTOMOTIVE CREDIT CORPORATION ARE TO PAY ANY OUTSTANDING FEES TO AAA TO REINSTATE THIS CASE THEREIN. DEFENDANTS IN-HOUSE AUTO FINANCE, INC. AND AUTOMOTIVE CREDIT CORPORATION ARE JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY ORDERED TO PAY PLAINTIFF’S COSTS IN THE AMOUNT OF $439.95 WITHIN 30 DAYS.

 

SUMMARY OF COMPLAINT: Action for violation of Consumer Legal Remedies Act, unfair or unlawful business practices, negligent misrepresentation, and related claims.

REQUEST FOR RELIEF: Compel Defendants In-House Auto Finance, Inc. and Automotive Credit Corporation to arbitrate this controversy pursuant to the parties’ agreement.

OPPOSITION: None filed as of November 8, 2019.

ANALYSIS:

On September 3, 2019, Plaintiff Ernesto Castillo-Diaz (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against Defendants In-House Auto Finance, Inc. (“Dealer”), Automotive Credit Corporation (“Holder”), and Hudson Insurance Company (“Hudson”). Only Hudson has answered the Complaint. Plaintiff filed the instant Motion to Compel Arbitration on September 19, 2019. To date, no opposition has been filed.

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.” (CCP §§ 1281.2(a)-(b).) As with other types of agreements, “[t]he failure of the [party] to carefully read the agreement and the amendment is not a reason to refuse to enforce the arbitration provisions.” (Powers v. Dickson, Carlson & Campillo (1997) 54 Cal.App.4th 1102, 1115.) “California law, ‘like [federal law], reflects a strong policy favoring arbitration agreements and requires close judicial scrutiny of waiver claims.’” (Wagner Const. Co. v. Pacific Mechanical Corp. (2007) 41 Cal.4th 19, 31.) If the court orders arbitration, then the court shall stay the action until arbitration is completed. (See CCP § 1281.4.)

Discussion

Plaintiff brings the instant Motion seeking to compel Dealer and Holder to submit to arbitration based on a Retail Installment Sale Contract to purchase a car (the “Contract”). (Motion, Heydari Decl., Exh. 2.) Both Plaintiff and Dealer are parties to the Contract, and Holder is alleged to have been assigned the contract. (See Compl., ¶6.) Plaintiff provides evidence of the existence of the arbitration agreement in the sales contract. (Motion, Heydari Decl., Exh. 2, p. 4.) He further demonstrates that his demand to Dealer and Holder to arbitrate the dispute was ignored and the Court’s intervention is needed to compel the parties to arbitration. (Id. at ¶¶8-12.) Neither Dealer nor Holder has submitted an opposition to the instant Motion. Accordingly, Plaintiff has demonstrated the existence of an arbitration agreement and the Court finds there is no defense to its enforcement.

Plaintiff also requests costs for having to bring the instant Motion. “The court shall award costs upon any judicial proceeding under this title as provided in Chapter 6 (commencing with Section 1021) of Title 14 of Part 2 of this code.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 1293.2.) “A petition to compel arbitration under section 1281.2 is a judicial proceeding covered by this provision.” (Otay River Constructors v. San Diego Expressway (2008) 158 Cal.App.4th 796, 805.) Therefore, Plaintiff is awarded costs of $439.95. (Motion, p. 7:18-23.)

Conclusion

Plaintiff Ernesto Castillo-Diaz’s Motion to Compel Arbitration and Request for Costs is GRANTED. THE MATTER IS TO BE ARBITRATED BEFORE THE AAA AND DEFENDANTS ARE TO PAY ANY OUTSTANDING FEES TO AAA TO REINSTATE THIS CASE THEREIN. DEFENDANTS ARE JOINTLY AND SEVERALLY ORDERED TO PAY PLAINTIFF’S COSTS IN THE AMOUNT OF $439.95 WITHIN 30 DAYS.

Moving party to give notice.