Van Muers-Bradley v. AutoNation CA3

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 14, 2025C100938California3,577 words

Opinion

Opinion

FACTS AND HISTORY OF THE PROCEEDINGS

AutoNation employed plaintiff from February 28 to October 5, 2023. In connection with her employment, plaintiff signed an arbitration agreement. By signing the agreement, plaintiff agreed to resolve any claim or dispute arising from her employment with AutoNation by binding arbitration on an individual basis only. Any arbitration would be governed by the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) (9 U.S.C. § 1 et seq.). The arbitration agreement excluded certain claims from mandatory arbitration. The excluded claims were claims arising under the National Labor Relations Act, workers’ compensation claims, state unemployment compensation claims, and claims arising out of any other written contract between AutoNation and plaintiff where the contract specifically provided for resolution through the courts. The arbitration

2 agreement also did not foreclose pursuit of administrative remedies through their exhaustion. Plaintiff filed this action on October 18, 2023. The complaint contains 13 causes of action: (1) harassment based on sex, race, age, and/or disability in violation of the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) (Gov. Code, § 12900 et…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.