OWENS vs WINDSOR COUNTRY DRIVE CARE CENTER, LLC

Under California law, “[t]he burden of persuasion is always on the moving party to prove the existence of an arbitration agreement with the opposing party by a preponderance of the evidence ....” (Gamboa v. Northeast Community Clinic (2021) 72 Cal.App.5th 158, 164– 165.) “However, the burden of production may shift in a three-step process.” (Id. at p. 165.) “First, the moving party bears the burden of producing ‘prima facie evidence of a written agreement to arbitrate the controversy.’ [Citation.]” (Ibid.) “The moving party ‘can meet its initial burden by attaching to the [motion or] petition a copy of the arbitration 25CV137390: OWENS vs WINDSOR COUNTRY DRIVE CARE CENTER, LLC 07/02/2026 Hearing on Motion to Compel Arbitration filed by WINDSOR COUNTRY DRIVE CARE CENTER, LLC (Defendant) CRS# 183779988803 in Department 520 agreement purporting to bear the [opposing party's] signature.’ [Citation.]” (Ibid.) “Alternatively, the moving party can meet its burden by setting forth the agreement's provisions in the motion.” (Ibid.) “For this step, ‘it is not necessary to follow the normal procedures of document authentication.’ [Citation.]” (Ibid.)

DISCUSSION

The parties dispute whether a valid agreement to arbitrate exists.

Both parties present limited evidence, but from what is offered, the Court concludes that, although Defendant has met its burden of proving the existence of a valid arbitration agreement by a preponderance of the evidence, Plaintiff has produced evidence challenging the authenticity of the agreement. (See Ran1os v. Westlake Services LLC (2015) 242 Cal.App.4th 674, 685 [court must begin by determining whether plaintiff signed the agreement containing an arbitration clause]; see Civil Code§ 1633.9; and Ruiz v. Moss Bros. Auto Group, Inc. (2014) 232 Cal.App.4th 836, 842 [trial court may weigh conflicting evidence to determine whether arbitration agreement exists].)

Initial Prima Facie Burden

“If the moving party meets its initial prima facie burden and the opposing party disputes the agreement, then in the second step, the opposing party bears the burden of producing evidence to challenge the authenticity of the agreement.” (Gamboa, supra, 72 Cal.App.5th at p. 165.) “The opposing party can do this in several ways. For example, the opposing party may testify under oath or declare under penalty of perjury that the party never saw or does not remember seeing the agreement, or that the party never signed or does not remember signing the agreement.” (Ibid. [emphasis added].)

Second Step

In Gamboa, the Court of Appeal found that the plaintiff “met her burden on the second step by filing an opposing declaration, saying she did not recall the agreement and would not have signed it if she had been aware of it: ‘I do not remember these documents at all .... Had I been made aware of the existence of an arbitration agreement, and been explained its provisions, I would not have signed any such documents.”’ (Gamboa, supra, 72 Cal.App.5th at p. 167.)

Here, Plaintiff similarly declares under penalty of perjury that she did not recall signing or receiving any arbitration agreement, or have any memory of anyone even mentioning arbitration whatsoever during her admission to Defendant’s care facility in June 2022. (Owens Decl., ¶¶ 2- 3.)

This is sufficient for the Court to find that Plaintiff has met her burden of producing evidence

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ALAMEDA

25CV137390: OWENS vs WINDSOR COUNTRY DRIVE CARE CENTER, LLC 07/02/2026 Hearing on Motion to Compel Arbitration filed by WINDSOR COUNTRY DRIVE CARE CENTER, LLC (Defendant) CRS# 183779988803 in Department 520 challenging the authenticity of the Arbitration Agreement by declaring under penalty of perjury that she did not sign or receive any arbitration agreement. In other words, Plaintiff implies that someone other than herself signed or agreed to the subject Arbitration Agreement.

Third Step

“If the opposing party meets its burden of producing evidence, then in the third step, the moving party must establish with admissible evidence a valid arbitration agreement between the parties. The burden of proving the agreement by a preponderance of the evidence remains with the moving party.” (Gamboa, supra, 72 Cal.App.5th at pp. 165–166.)

Additional Discovery

As Defendant proposes additional time to engage in limited discovery to obtain evidence in support of its position, the Court CONTINUES the Motion to Compel Arbitration to September 11, 2026 and orders concise supplemental briefing from both parties to make a final substantive determination. (Reply, p. 5:23-6.)

Any further brief from Defendant must be filed and served no later than September 2, 2026 - service by electronic mail no later than 12:00 noon. Any further brief from Plaintiff must be filed and served no later than September 7, 2026 - electronic copy or hard copy directly to Department 520 no later than 12:00 noon.

The Hearing on Motion to Compel Arbitration filed by WINDSOR COUNTRY DRIVE CARE CENTER, LLC (Defendant) CRS# 183779988803 scheduled for 04/30/2026 is continued to 09/11/2026 at 11:00 AM in Department 520 at Hayward Hall of Justice.

NOTICE: This tentative ruling will automatically become the court’s final order on July 2, 2026 unless, by no later than 4:00 P.M. on July 1, 2026, a party to the action notifies BOTH: 1) the court by emailing Dept520@alameda.courts.ca.gov; AND 2) all opposing counsel or selfrepresented parties (by telephone or email) that the party is contesting this tentative ruling.

The subject line (RE:) of the email must state: “Request for CONTESTED HEARING: [the case name], [number].” When a party emails to contest a tentative ruling, the party must identify the specific holding(s) within the ruling they wish to contest via oral argument.

The court does not provide court reporters for hearings in civil departments. A party who wants a

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ALAMEDA

25CV137390: OWENS vs WINDSOR COUNTRY DRIVE CARE CENTER, LLC 07/02/2026 Hearing on Motion to Compel Arbitration filed by WINDSOR COUNTRY DRIVE CARE CENTER, LLC (Defendant) CRS# 183779988803 in Department 520 record of the proceedings must engage a private court reporter. (Local Rule 3.95.) Any privately retained court reporter must also participate via video conference. Their email must be provided to the court at the time the Notice of Contest is emailed.

ALL CONTESTED LAW AND MOTION HEARINGS ARE CONDUCTED VIA REMOTE VIDEO unless an in person appearance is required by the court. Invitations to participate in the video proceeding will be sent by the court upon receipt of timely notice of contest. A party may give email notice that they will appear in court in person for the hearing, however all other counsel/parties and the JUDGE MAY APPEAR REMOTELY.