Siguenza v. 24 Carrots CA4/3

Filed 10/4/22 Siguenza v. 24 Carrots CA4/3

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION THREE

PRISCILLA SIGUENZA,

Plaintiff and Appellant, G060388

v. (Super. Ct. No. 30-2020-01160884)

24 CARROTS, LLC, et al., OPI NION

Defendants and Respondents.

Appeal from an order of the Superior Court of Orange County, Glenda A. Sanders, Judge. Motion to dismiss appeal. Granted. Appeal dismissed. Protection Law Group, Heather Davis, Amir Nayebdadash and Priscilla Gamino for Plaintiff and Appellant. Law Office of Brian R. Weilbacher, Brian R. Weilbacher; Ferguson Case Orr Paterson and John A. Hribar for Defendants and Respondents.

* * *

Plaintiff Priscilla Siguenza sued her former employer for various violations of the Labor Code, asserting individual and class claims in the current action, and claims under the California Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) in a separate action. Siguenza amended the current action to add a new named plaintiff who also asserts individual and class claims based on the same alleged violations of the Labor Code. Defendants 24 Carrots, LLC, 24 Carrots Special Events, Inc., and 24 Carrots Catering and Events (collectively defendants) filed a petition to compel arbitration, which the trial court granted. Siguenza appealed from that order. An order granting a petition to compel arbitration is not an appealable order. This case does not come within the “death knell” exception to the nonappealability rule. The order compelling arbitration of Siguenza’s individual claims and dismissal of her class claims is not the death knell of the class’s claims because the class’s PAGA claims and the newly named plaintiff’s individual and class claims are still pending. The appeal from a nonappealable order must be dismissed.