Drive Insurance Co. v. Jireh Auto Transportation, et al

14. Drive Insurance Co. v. Jireh Auto Transportation, et al, Case No. CIVSB2536009 Defendant Jireh’s Demurrer 6/22/26, 10:00 a.m., Dept. S-17

This hearing was continued from the original April 8, 2026, date The Court would SUSTAIN the demurrer with thirty (30) days’ leave to amend. Here, the movant’s filed its demurrer, alleging uncertainty. Plaintiff failed to substantively oppose the demurrer; although, it submitted a declaration requesting that leave to amend be granted. (See Nivinskus Decl., ¶7.) Thus, it appears the arguments are conceded. (DuPont Merck Pharmaceutical Co. v. Superior Court (2000) 78 Cal.App.4th 562, 566 [“By failing to argue the contrary, plaintiffs concede this issue.”]; see Pacifica First National, Inc. v. Abekasis (2021) 50 Cal.App.5th 654, 657 [Not returning to a topic on reply, “is a concession.”].) The Court would, therefore, sustain with leave to amend. *** *** ***

15. Navarro Morales v. Blue Star Claims, et al, Case No. CIVSB2607908 Petitioner Navarro Morales’s Petition to Compel Arbitration 6/22/26, 10:00 a.m., Dept. S-17

Tentative Ruling The Court would GRANT, in part, and compel Respondent U.S. Fire to arbitrate Petitioner’s claims. The Court would, however, DENY the motion as to Respondents Blue Star and would further DENY the request to consolidate the arbitration proceedings with the proceeding involving Mobilitas. The Court would DENY Petitioner’s request for fees. Case Summary Through the pending proceeding, Petitioner Navarro Morales seeks to compel Respondents Blue Star Claims, LLC (Blue Star) and United States Fire Insurance Co. (U.S.

Fire) to arbitrate his insurance claim. The petition indicates Morales was working as a rideshare driver and was injured in a rear-end collision in February 2024, by an uninsured motorist. At the time of the collision, the rideshare service maintained the at issue insurance for its drivers that included uninsured motorist coverage. That insurance policy also contains an arbitration provision. Although Petitioner submitted a claim for benefits and demanded arbitration, Blue Star denied that arbitration proceedings were required.

The Petition also indicates Blue Star administered the policy, but the documents attached to the Petition indicates U.S. Fire was the insurer.