Ballou v. Verizon Wireless Services CA2/2
Filed 4/7/23 Ballou v. Verizon Wireless Services CA2/2 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 TWO
DE WANA BALLOU, B324537
Plaintiff and Appellant, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. v. 21STCV20672)
VERIZON WIRELESS SERVICES, LLC,
Defendant and Respondent.
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, William F. Fahey, Judge. Affirmed. DeWana Ballou, in pro. per., for Plaintiff and Appellant. Goodman Law Firm and Brett B. Goodman for Defendant and Respondent. ________________________________________
Plaintiff and appellant DeWana Ballou (plaintiff) appeals from the judgment confirming an arbitration award against her and in favor of defendant and respondent Verizon Wireless Services, LLC, erroneously sued as Verizon Communications, Inc. (defendant). We affirm the judgment. BACKGROUND The parties and their arbitration agreement Plaintiff contracted with defendant to receive cellular telephone services. When plaintiff upgraded her service plan with defendant in July 2011, she accepted the terms and conditions of defendant’s customer agreement. The customer agreement included a provision requiring resolution of any dispute between the parties either by arbitration or in small claims court.1
1The arbitration provision states in relevant part: “How Do I Resolve Disputes with Verizon Wireless? [¶] . . . [¶] YOU AND VERIZON WIRELESS BOTH AGREE TO RESOLVE DISPUTES ONLY BY ARBITRATION OR IN SMALL CLAIMS COURT. . . . WE ALSO BOTH AGREE THAT: [¶] (1) THE FEDERAL ARBITRATION ACT APPLIES TO THIS AGREEMENT. EXCEPT FOR SMALL CLAIMS COURT CASES THAT QUALIFY, ANY DISPUTE THAT RESULTS FROM THIS AGREEMENT OR FROM THE SERVICES YOU RECEIVE FROM US (OR FROM ANY ADVERTISING FOR ANY PRODUCTS OR SERVICES) WILL BE RESOLVED BY ONE OR MORE NEUTRAL ARBITRATORS BEFORE THE AMERICAN ARBITRATION ASSOCIATION (‘AAA’) OR BETTER BUSINESS BUREAU (‘BBB’). . . .”
More from California Court of Appeal
- People v. Hill (1998)
- In Re Autumn H. (1994)
- Nwosu v. Uba (2004)
- In Re Casey D. (1999)
- Santisas v. Goodin (1998)
- Cahill v. San Diego Gas & Electric Co. (2011)
- People v. Rivera (2015)
- People v. Barnett (1998)
- People v. Serrano (2012)
- Benach v. County of Los Angeles (2007)