Pinedo

Pinedo v. Premium Tobacco Stores, Inc.

Good Law
102 Cal. Rptr. 2d 435·2000 Cal. App. LEXIS 968·2000 Daily Journal DAR 13475·85 Cal. App. 4th 774·84 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 1090
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 19, 2000B138076California2,331 words

Opinion

Opinion

In Armendariz v. Foundation Psychcare Services, Inc. (2000) 24 Cal.4th 83 [ 99 Cal.Rptr.2d 745 , 6 P.3d 669 ] (Armendariz), our Supreme Court reversed an order compelling arbitration in a wrongful termination action brought under the California Fair Employment Housing Act (FEHA) (Gov. Code, § 12900 et seq.). It concluded that the arbitration provision relied upon was unconscionable and unenforceable. This appeal presents the same issue focused on in Armendariz: whether the so-called agreement to arbitrate is so one-sided that it should not be enforced. We conclude in the affirmative and affirm the order of the trial court denying compelled arbitration.

Statement of Facts

On August 6, 1999, plaintiff, Ben Pinedo, filed a complaint for damages against named defendants Premium Tobacco Stores, Inc. (Premium), Cigarettes Cheaper! (Cigarettes) and Jim Tapp (collectively, defendants). The complaint alleges that beginning on August 3, 1996, and through May 7, 1999, plaintiff was employed by Premium, a subsidiary of Cigarettes, as a driver and deliveryman. In December 1997, Tapp became the manager at two locations for Premium, locations plaintiff had occasion to…

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.