Youngblood v. Logistic Resources in Motion, LLC CA1/3
Filed 3/29/24 Youngblood v. Logistic Resources in Motion, LLC CA1/3
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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
FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION THREE
JARVIS JERRY YOUNGBLOOD, Plaintiff and Appellant, A166098 v. LOGISTIC RESOURCES IN (Contra Costa County MOTION LLC et al., Super. Ct. No. MSC21-02675) Defendants and Respondents.
In this wage-and-hour action, Jarvis Jerry Youngblood appeals from an order compelling arbitration of his individual claims, dismissing his class claims, and staying the underlying proceedings. When the trial court entered this order, Youngblood had a separate suit pending against the same defendants—Logistic Resources in Motion, LLC (LRIM) and Amazon Logistics, Inc. (Amazon) (collectively respondents)—with claims under the Labor Code Private Attorneys General Act of 2004 (Lab. Code, §§ 2698, et seq.) (PAGA) that paralleled his claims in this action. Generally, an order compelling arbitration is not immediately appealable, and because
1
Youngblood’s PAGA claims remained pending, the death knell doctrine does not apply. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal.1 FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND LRIM is a Richmond-based delivery company, and Amazon is one of its clients. LRIM employs local delivery drivers to pick up and deliver client’s packages within California. Youngblood worked as an LRIM delivery driver from March 29, 2021, to May 20, 2021. His employment was subject to an arbitration agreement that contained a class action waiver. Following the end of his employment, Youngblood filed two separate complaints against LRIM and Amazon. On December 27, 2021, Youngblood filed a putative class action raising wage-and-hour claims under Business and Professions Code §§ 17200, et seq. On May 26, 2022, Youngblood filed a separate complaint asserting nearly identical claims under PAGA, in both an individual and representative capacity.2 Before the second filing date, on April 29, 2022, LRIM moved in the first case to compel individual arbitration, dismiss class claims, and stay proceedings, and Amazon joined the motion. The trial court issued a tentative decision granting respondents’ motion on June 8, 2022, and held a hearing on June 9, 2022. After hearing the
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)