Marchetti v. Ford of Simi Valley, Inc. CA2/1

California Court of Appeal Nov 19, 2020 No. B297026Unpublished

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that the parties entered into a valid arbitration agreement that delegates questions of arbitrability, including the enforceability of claims for public injunctive relief, to the arbitrator. Consequently, the trial court's order compelling arbitration was affirmed, but the portion of the order making substantive findings on arbitrability was vacated.

Issues

Did the parties form a valid agreement to arbitrate?
Does the arbitration agreement's delegation clause require an arbitrator to decide the enforceability of claims for public injunctive relief?

Disposition. Affirmed in part and vacated in part.

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“We conclude, as did the trial court, that an agreement to arbitrate exists between the parties.”

“the parties’ agreement to arbitrate delegates questions of arbitrability to the arbitrator.”

Filed 11/19/20 Marchetti v. Ford of Simi Valley, Inc. CA2/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 ONE

ELIZABETH MARCHETTI, et B297026 al., (Los Angeles County Plaintiffs and Super. Ct. No. BC700684) Appellants,

FORD OF SIMI VALLEY, INC.,

Defendant and Respondent.

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Amy D. Hogue, Judge. Affirmed in part and vacated in part. Sanchez Law, J. Elias Sanchez; Liddle & Liddle, and Raymond Zakari for Plaintiffs and Appellants. Manning, Leaver, Bruder & Berberich, Gary H. Prudian, and Kimberly L. Phan for Defendant and Respondent.

____________________________ Elizabeth and Frank Marchetti appeal from a trial court order granting Ford of Simi Valley, Inc.’s (FOSV) motion to compel arbitration. The Marchettis contend they did not consent to arbitration. Alternatively, they argue that the arbitration agreement is unenforceable because it purports to waive claims for public injunctive relief contrary to McGill v. Citibank, N.A. (2017) 2 Cal.5th 945 (McGill). We will affirm the trial court’s order.

BACKGROUND The Marchettis filed a class action complaint in April 2018 based on their December 2017 purchase of a 2015 Ford Explorer Sport from FOSV. The Marchettis alleged that FOSV advertised the vehicle for a specific price both on a cell phone app and on FOSV’s Web site, but then refused to sell the vehicle for the advertised price.1 The Marchettis purchased the vehicle at the higher price. As part of their transaction, the Marchettis signed a document entitled “RETAIL INSTALLMENT SALE CONTRACT – SIMPLE FINANCE CHARGE (WITH ARBITRATION PROVISION).”2 In their opening brief, the Marchettis describe the contract as “a one page, double-sided form” that the

Marchetti v. Ford of Simi Valley, Inc. CA2/1

AI Brief

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION ONE

FORD OF SIMI VALLEY, INC.,

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

CHANEY, J.

AI Brief