Quintana v. American International Industries CA2/3

Filed 8/2/16 Quintana v. American International Industries CA2/3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION THREE

DULCE QUINTANA, B262241

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BC562040) v.

AMERICAN INTERNATIONAL INDUSTRIES,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Michael P. Linfield, Judge. Affirmed.

Conkle, Kremer & Engel, John A. Conkle, H. Kim Sim, and Emil Davtyan for Defendant and Appellant.

Law Offices of Ramin R. Younessi, Ramin R. Younessi and Christina M. Coleman for Plaintiff and Respondent.

_____________________

INTRODUCTION Plaintiff Dulce Quintana sued Defendant American International Industries for wrongful discriminatory employment termination. Defendant appeals the trial court’s denial of its petition to compel arbitration of Quintana’s claims, asserting that the trial court erred in finding that no valid, enforceable arbitration agreement existed. We affirm because Defendant failed to show that Quintana executed an arbitration agreement and thus consented to the arbitration terms. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND Quintana cannot read, write, or understand English. In July 2012, Quintana applied for employment with Defendant, filling out an employment application. Quintana began working for Defendant in July 2012, and worked for Defendant for a little more than a year. In October 2014, Quintana brought the present lawsuit against Defendant, alleging wrongful termination, discrimination, and other related causes of action. In response, Defendant filed a petition to compel arbitration, alleging Quintana signed an employment application and an employee trade secrets and inventions agreement, both containing clauses that require her to arbitrate all disputes regarding her employment. Attached to the petition was the declaration of Charlie Loveless, the Vice President of Operations for Defendant, and the partially-redacted employment application and trade secrets agreement allegedly signed by Defendant. Loveless attested it was Defendant’s “policy and the regular course of business” to require prospective employees to sign an application for employment and an employee trade secrets and inventions agreement. He stated: