Sequoia Education v. Super. Ct. CA1/1

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaOctober 15, 2013A134411California2,520 words

Opinion

Opinion

I. BACKGROUND

On September 29, 2011, defendants filed a petition to confirm an arbitration award (petition). The petition alleged plaintiffs are former students of schools operated by defendant Sequoia Education, Inc. and its parent company, defendant Corinthian Colleges, Inc. In enrolling in the schools, each plaintiff executed an arbitration agreement requiring “any dispute” to be “resolved by binding arbitration under the Federal Arbitration Act conducted by the American Arbitration Association (‘AAA’) under its Commercial Rules.” The provision does not mention class arbitration. On May 28, 2008, plaintiffs commenced an arbitration challenging the quality of their educations, asserting their claims on behalf of a putative class. Pursuant to AAA rules, the arbitrator initially considered whether the arbitration clause permitted resolution of disputes by class arbitration. In a “Clause Construction Award” issued September 11, 2009, the arbitrator elected to apply California law in finding class arbitration to be available when an arbitration clause is silent.1 Although he recognized the same issue under the FAA was before the United States Supreme Court, the arbitrator declined…

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.