 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Brookwood v. Bank of America5/31/1996
PREMO, Acting P. J.
Plaintiff Johnetta Brookwood sued her former employers defendants Bank of America NT & SA, a California corporation (hereafter, Bank), BA Investment Services, Inc., a California corporation (hereafter, BAIS), and Robert Goldman for wrongful termination (sex discrimination) contrary to California's Fair Employment and Housing Act. (Gov. Code, § 12900 et seq.) Defendants filed a petition to compel arbitration on the ground that a written agreement to arbitrate existed. (Code Civ. Proc., § 1281.2.) Plaintiff opposed the petition by arguing that (1) she did not knowingly agree to submit her claims to arbitration, and (2) no agreement to arbitrate with Bank existed in any event. The trial court granted the petition, and plaintiff appeals from the order. We affirm.
SCOPE OF REVIEW
In California the issue of the validity of an arbitration agreement "is determined upon a petition to compel arbitration." ( Strauch v. Eyring (1994) 30 Cal. App. 4th 181, 185-186 [35 Cal. Rptr. 2d 747].) "A petition to compel arbitration is to be heard in the manner of a motion. [Citation.] Factual issues on motions are submitted on affidavits or declarations (or oral testimony in the court's discretion). [Citations.]" ( Id. at p. 184.)
Whether an arbitration agreement applies to a controversy is a question of law to which the appellate court applies its independent judgment where no conflicting extrinsic evidence in aid of interpretation was introduced in the trial court. ( Bos Material Handling, Inc. v. Crown Controls Corp. (1982) 137 Cal. App. 3d 99, 105 [186 Cal. Rptr. 740].) Here, no conflicting extrinsic evidence in aid of interpretation was introduced.
"The fundamental canon of interpreting written instruments is the ascertainment of the intent of the parties. [Citations.] As a rule, the language of an instrument must govern its interpretation if the language is clear and explicit." ( Ticor Title Ins. Co. v. Rancho Santa Fe Assn. (1986) 177 Cal. App. 3d 726, 730 [223 Cal. Rptr. 175].)
The parties agree that this case is governed by the Federal Arbitration Act (9 U.S.C.S. § 1 et seq.; hereafter, the Act). "Generally, under the Act, arbitration is strongly favored, and 'any doubts concerning the scope of arbitrable issues should be resolved in favor of arbitration. . . .' [Citations.]" ( Rice v. Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc. (1991) 235 Cal. App. 3d 1016, 1023 [1 Cal. Rptr. 2d 265].) California also has a " 'strong public policy in favor of arbitration as a speedy and relatively inexpensive means of dispute resolution.' " ( Strauch v. Eyring, (supra) , 30 Cal. App. 4th at p. 186.) The California Supreme Court has "warned against 'procedural gamesmanship' aimed at undermining the advantages of arbitration. [Citation.]" (Ericksen, Arbuthnot, McCarthy, Kearney & Walsh, Inc. v. 100 Oak Street (1983) 35 Cal. 3d 312, 323 [197 Cal. Rptr. 581, 673 P.2d 251].)
The Act "provides that a written arbitration provision in a contract involving commerce is valid and enforceable 'save upon such grounds as exist at law or in equity for the revocation of any contract.' [Citation.]" ( Lynch v. Cruttenden & Co. (1993) 18 Cal. App. 4th 802, 807 [22 Cal. Rptr. 2d 636].) " 'tate law, whether of legislative or judicial origin, is applicable [to arbitration clauses] if that law arose to govern issues concerning the validity, revocability, and enforceability of contracts generally.' [Citations.]" ( Rice v. Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc., (supra) , 235 Cal. App. 3d at p. 1023.)
California law states: "A written agreement to submit to arbitration an existing controversy or a controversy thereafter arising is valid, enforceable and irrev
Page 1 2 3 4 California Employee Leasing Services
Employee Leasing Services
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|