Motion to Compel Arbitration
Case No.: VCU331954 Date: May 26, 2026 Time: 8:30 A.M. Dept. 2-The Honorable Bret D. Hillman Motion: Motion to Compel Arbitration Tentative Ruling: To grant the unopposed motion. The court sets a Case Management Conferenced to review the status of the arbitration on December 18, 2026, at 8:30 AM in Dept.
2.
Background
Facts In this matter, Plaintiff sues Defendant Fresno Couty Private Security for disability discrimination, failure to provide a reasonable accommodation, failure to engage in the interactive process, retaliation, wrongful termination, failure to provide meal and res periods, failure to reimburse for business expenses and failure to produce personnel records. Defendant seeks to compel arbitration of these claims.
Facts - Agreement to Arbitrate In support, Defendant provides the declaration of its director of operations who states personal knowledge as to Plaintiff's hiring on November 17, 2024, and signature as to various intake documents and forms required for employment with Defendant. (Declaration of Rogers P.P.1-3.) Defendant requires all new employees to sign an Arbitration Agreement as a condition of their employment. (Declaration Rogers P.4.) Defendant indicates Plaintiff electronically signed the Arbitration Agreement on the date of hiring. (Declaration of Rogers P.4 - Ex. A.) No opposition has been filed.
Authority and Analysis - Agreement to Arbitrate "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." (Code Civ. Proc. Sec. 1281.2(a), (b).) (emphasis added.)
The motion to compel arbitration requires the facts are to be proven by affidavit or declaration and documentary evidence with oral testimony taken only in the court's discretion. (Code Civ. Proc., Sec.1290.2; Rosenthal v. Great Western Fin. Securities Corp. (1996) 14 Cal.4th 394, 413-414.) The motion must set forth the provisions of the written agreement and the arbitration clause verbatim, or such provisions must be attached and incorporated by reference. (
Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities
Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”
"For purposes of a petition to compel arbitration, it is not necessary to follow the normal procedures of document authentication." (Condee, supra, 88 Cal.App.4th at 218; Sprunk v. Prisma LLC (2017) 14 Cal.App.5th 785, 793.) However, when the opposing party disputes the agreement, then the opposing party must provide evidence to challenge its authenticity. (Gamboa v. Northeast Community Clinic (2021) 72 Cal.App.5th 158, 165.)
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, supra, 72 Cal.App.5th at 164-165.) "However, the burden of production may shift in a three-step process." (Gamboa, supra, 72 Cal.App.5th at. 165.) "First, the moving party bears the burden of producing 'prima facie evidence of a written agreement to arbitrate the controversy.' [Citation.]" (Gamboa, supra, 72 Cal.App.5th at p. 165.) "The moving party 'can meet its initial burden by attaching to the [motion or] petition a copy of the arbitration agreement purporting to bear the [opposing party's] signature.' [Citation.]" (Id.) "For this step, 'it is not necessary to follow the normal procedures of document authentication.' [Citation.]" (Id.)
Here, Defendant has provided the Agreement it submits was signed by Plaintiff when Plaintiff started employment and has met the initial burden. Therefore, in the absence of an opposition, the Court finds an agreement to arbitrate.
Facts - Scope of Agreement The Agreement states: "Any dispute, controversy or claim arising from or regarding [Plaintiff's] employment with Fresno County Private Security ("FRESNO COUNTY PRIVATE SECURITY"), shall be submitted to and settled by binding arbitration, at the request of either party, in accordance with the Employment Dispute Resolution Procedures of the American Arbitration Association or other similar organization. The claims covered by this agreement include, but are not limited to, claims for wages and other compensation, claims for breach of contract (express or implied), tort claims, claims for discrimination (including but not limited to, race, sex, sexual orientation, religion, national origin, age, marital status, medical condition, and disability), harassment (including, but not limited to, race, sex, sexual orientation, religion, national origin, age, marital status, medical condition, and disability), and claims for any violation of any federal, state or other government law, statute, regulation, or ordinance, except for claims for workers' compensation or unemployment insurance benefits.
Nothing contained in this Agreement shall prohibit any current or former employee from filing a charge of discrimination with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and/or the Department of Fair Employment and Housing and cooperating in the investigation of such charge."
Authority and Analysis - Scope of Agreement As noted above, Plaintiff sues for a number of theories involving disability discrimination, wrongful termination and retaliation arising out of Plaintiff's employment with Defendants. As such, the Court finds these claims within the scope of the Agreement. The Court, having found an agreement to arbitrate the controversy exists and that the claims in this matter are within the scope of the Agreement, grants the unopposed motion and compels arbitration in this matter.
The court sets a Case Management Conferenced to review the status of the arbitration on December 18, 2026, at 8:30 AM in Dept.
2.
If no one requests oral argument, under Code of Civil Procedure section 1019.5(a) and California Rules of Court, rule 3.1312(a), no further written order is necessary. The minute order adopting this tentative ruling will become the order of the court and service by the clerk will constitute notice of the order.
Court reporters are usually not available for law and motion matters in the civil division. The parties and counsel must provide their own reporter if they want a transcript of the proceedings.
Re: Estes, Jeremy Lee vs. Cheema Transport, Inc.