ISRAEL ALEJANDRO SALAS CARPIZO VS SOUTHGATE AUTO, INC., ET AL.

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: 20STLC07174    Hearing Date: January 04, 2021    Dept: 25

HEARING DATE: Mon., January 4, 2021 JUDGE /DEPT: Blancarte/25

CASE NAME: Carpizo v. Southgate Auto, Inc., et al. COMPL. FILED: 08-24-20

CASE NUMBER: 20STLC07174 DISC. C/O: 01-23-22

PROCEEDINGS: MOTION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION, PETITION FOR COURT TO PICK ARBITRATION FORUM, REQUEST FOR STAY, AND REQUEST FOR COSTS

MOVING PARTY: Plaintiff Israel Alejandro Salas Carpizo

RESP. PARTY: None

MOTION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION

(CCP § 1281.2, et seq.)

TENTATIVE RULING:

Plaintiff Israel Alejandro Salas Carpizo’s Motion to Compel Arbitration, Petition for Court to Pick Arbitration Forum, Request for Stay, and Request for Costs is CONTINUED TO FEB 9, 2021 AT 11:00 A.M. in Department 25 at the SPRING STREET COURTHOUSE. At least 16 court days before the next scheduled hearing, Plaintiff must file supplemental papers addressing the deficiencies identified herein. Failure to do so may result in the Motion being placed off calendar or denied.

SERVICE:

[ ] Proof of Service Timely Filed (CRC, rule 3.1300) NO

[ ] Correct Address (CCP §§ 1013, 1013a) NO

[ ] 16/21 Court Days Lapsed (CCP §§ 12c, 1005(b)) NO

OPPOSITION: None filed as of December 30, 2020 [ ] Late [X] None

REPLY: None filed as of December 30, 2020 [ ] Late [X] None

ANALYSIS:

1. Background

On August 24, 2020, Plaintiff Israel Alejandro Salas Carpizo (“Plaintiff”) filed an action against Defendants Southgate Auto, Inc. dba Express Auto Lending (“Southgate Auto”), Westlake Services, LLC dba Westlake Financial Services (“Westlake”), and Hudson Insurance Company (“Hudson”).

Plaintiff dismissed Defendant Hudson from the action with prejudice on November 18, 2020.

To date, no opposition has been filed.

1. 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 to the agreement refuses to arbitrate that 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 rescission of the agreement.” (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 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 Code Civ. Proc., § 1281.4.)

1. Discussion

As an initial matter, the Court notes that because Defendant Southgate Auto has not yet been served with this action or with the instant Motion, the Court has no jurisdiction over it. In addition, the proof of service as to Defendant Westlake demonstrates the Summons, Complaint, and instant Motion were served on September 30, 2020 by substitute service but does not identify the name of the person served on behalf of the corporation. Before the Court can issue a ruling on the merits, Plaintiff must address the service issues noted above.

1. Conclusion & Order

For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff Israel Alejandro Salas Carpizo’s Motion to Compel Arbitration, Petition for Court to Pick Arbitration Forum, Request for Stay, and Request for Costs is CONTINUED TO FEB 9, 2021 AT 11:00 A.M. in Department 25 at the SPRING STREET COURTHOUSE. At least 16 court days before the next scheduled hearing, Plaintiff must file supplemental papers addressing the deficiencies identified herein. Failure to do so may result in the Motion being placed off calendar or denied.

Moving party is ordered to give notice.