IN THE MATTER OF: ANAMARIJA BARBARA ANTIC-JEZILDZIC

A Stipulation and Appointment of Official Reporter Pro Tempore (CV/E-206) is required to be signed by each party, the private court reporter, and the Judge prior to the hearing, if not using a

26CV012134: IN THE MATTER OF: ANAMARIJA BARBARA ANTIC-JEZILDZIC 07/29/2026 Hearing on Motion to Compel Arbitration and Appoint Arbitration in an Underinsured Motorist Action with Request for Sanctions [C.C.P. 1281.6, Insurance Code 11580.2(f)] in Department 8D

reporter from the Court’s Approved Official Reporter Pro Tempore list.

Once the form is signed it must be filed with the clerk. If a litigant has been granted a fee waiver and requests a court reporter, the party must submit a Request for Court Reporter by a Party with a Fee Waiver (CV/E-211) and it must be filed with the clerk at least 10 days prior to the hearing or at the time the proceeding is scheduled if less than 10 days away. Once approved, the clerk will forward the form to the Court Reporter’s Office and an official reporter will be provided.

*** EFFECTIVE APRIL 13, 2026, THIS DEPARTMENT HAS MOVED TO THE TANI G. CANTIL-SAKAUYE COURTHOUSE LOCATED AT 500 G STREET IN SACRAMENTO, CA 95814. ALL HEARINGS NOTICED FOR DEPARTMENT 25 WILL BE HEARD IN DEPARTMENT 8D OF THE NEW COURTHOUSE. ***

TENTATIVE RULING:

Moving counsel’s notice of motion does not provide notice of the Court’s tentative ruling system, as required by Local Rule 1.06. Moving counsel is directed to contact Plaintiffs’ counsel and advise counsel of Local Rule 1.06 and the Court’s tentative ruling procedure and the manner to request a hearing. If moving counsel is unable to contact Plaintiff’s counsel prior to hearing, moving counsel is ordered to appear at the hearing.

Claimant Anamarija Barbara Antic-Jezildzic’s (“Claimant”) motion to compel arbitration and appoint arbitrator pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 1281.6 is ruled upon as follows.

In this underinsured motorist matter, Claimant brought this claim against Respondent Geico General Insurance Company (“Respondent”) pursuant to Insurance Code section 11580.2. Claimant contends that the arbitration agreement does not provide for a method for appointing an arbitrator because the policy does not address how an arbitrator should be selected. (Declaration of Hank Greenblatt (“Greenblatt Decl.”, ¶ 11.) Conversely, Respondent contends that the arbitration agreement provides for the arbitration to proceed under the AAA rules, which includes rules governing the selection of an arbitrator. (Declaration of Kelly Hass, ¶ 5-6.)

Insurance Code section 11580.2, subdivision (f) requires that an uninsured motorist policy contain a provision requiring arbitration by a single neutral arbitrator. Although

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO

26CV012134: IN THE MATTER OF: ANAMARIJA BARBARA ANTIC-JEZILDZIC 07/29/2026 Hearing on Motion to Compel Arbitration and Appoint Arbitration in an Underinsured Motorist Action with Request for Sanctions [C.C.P. 1281.6, Insurance Code 11580.2(f)] in Department 8D

Claimant’s motion is styled as a motion to compel arbitration, there appears to be no dispute between the parties that the instant matter is subject to arbitration. (See Opposition at p. 3:8-9 [“the Court should grant the Insured’s motion only in part as to the fact that this UIM dispute should proceed to arbitration”].) Thus, the only apparent dispute between the parties is whether this Court should appoint a neutral arbitrator pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 1281.6 or whether the arbitration agreement provides a method for appointing an arbitrator.

Code of Civil Procedure section 1281.6 states, in relevant part:

If the arbitration agreement provides a method of appointing an arbitrator, that method shall be followed. If the arbitration agreement does not provide a method for appointing an arbitrator, the parties to the agreement who seek arbitration and against whom arbitration is sought may agree on a method of appointing an arbitrator and that method shall be followed. In the absence of an agreed method, or if the agreed method fails or for any reason cannot be followed, or when an arbitrator appointed fails to act and his or her successor has not been appointed, the court, on petition of a party to the arbitration agreement, shall appoint the arbitrator.

The Court concludes that the petition for arbitrator selection should be denied on the grounds that it is not yet appropriate for the Court to appoint a neutral arbitrator pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 1281.6. Here, the subject arbitration agreement—set forth in Respondent’s Policy regarding Underinsured Motorist benefits—provides that the arbitration shall proceed under the AAA rules, which includes a process for selecting an arbitrator. (Haas Decl., Exh. A, at p. 12.) Specifically, Respondent points to AAA Consumer Rules, R-15, which provides that “[t]he AAA maintains a National Roster of Arbitrators (“Roster”) and shall appoint arbitrators from this Roster to resolve the parties’ dispute(s)” and that “[i]f the parties have not appointed an arbitrator and have not agreed to a process for appointing the arbitrator, the AAA will administratively appoint an arbitrator from the Roster.” (Haas Decl., Exh.

B, at p. 14.)

In the face of the agreement’s incorporation of AAA rules and the AAA rules provisions regarding arbitrator appointment, Claimant provides no legal authority to support its assertion that the policy is “silent on the arbitrator selection by the parties” and “speaks to how the arbitration should be conducted,” because it incorporates the AAA arbitration rules. In the absence of legal authority to support Claimant’s arguments, the Court cannot conclude that the agreement is “silent” as to the selection of an arbitrator as it

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO

26CV012134: IN THE MATTER OF: ANAMARIJA BARBARA ANTIC-JEZILDZIC 07/29/2026 Hearing on Motion to Compel Arbitration and Appoint Arbitration in an Underinsured Motorist Action with Request for Sanctions [C.C.P. 1281.6, Insurance Code 11580.2(f)] in Department 8D

appears that the AAA rules provide for a specific method of appointment of an arbitrator.

Where, as here, the subject arbitration provision contains a method for appointing an arbitrator, the Court can only appoint an arbitrator pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 1281.6 when the method for appointment has failed or for some reason cannot be followed. The Court concludes that Claimant has failed to make this showing. Claimant’s counsel’s mere objection to use of an AAA-selected arbitrator is insufficient, in the absence of additional legal authority or analysis, to show that the method for appointment has failed or cannot be followed. (Greenblatt Decl., ¶ 15.) Thus, the Court finds that on the record before it on the instant motion, Claimant has not demonstrated that the method of appointment set forth in the subject policy has failed or cannot be followed. As a result, the motion for the Court to select an arbitrator pursuant to section 1281.6 is DENIED.

Claimant’s request for sanctions is DENIED as Claimant provides no legal authority that would support an award of sanctions in connection with the instant motion.

Disposition

For the reasons explained above, the motion to compel arbitration is GRANTED. To the extent it also seeks to appoint an arbitrator, the motion is DENIED. The request for sanctions is DENIED.

This minute order is effective immediately. No formal order or other notice is required. (Code Civ. Proc., § 1019.5; Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1312.)