Marshall

Marshall v. Pontiac

Good Law
287 F. Supp. 2d 1229·2003 WL 22410528·2003 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 19030
United States District Court, Southern District of CaliforniaSeptember 17, 200303CV1007IEG(POR)California2,228 words

Opinion

Opinion

Gonzalez, J.

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION AND STAY PROCEEDINGS

Presently before the Court is John Hine Pontiac’s (“defendant”) motion to compel arbitration and stay this action pending arbitration. For the reasons discussed below, the Court grants defendant’s motion to compel arbitration of all claims and stays the action pending arbitration.

BACKGROUND

For thirty-five years, Nelson Marshall (“plaintiff’) was employed by defendant, a car dealership in San Diego, California. (See Compl. at ¶ 1). On October 31, 2002, however, defendant terminated plaintiffs employment. (See id.). Subsequent to his termination, plaintiff filed a complaint in California Superior Court stating causes of action for failure to pay overtime, age discrimination, wrongful termination in violation of public policy, and unfair business practices. On May 16, 2003 the action was removed to this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1441.

On May 27, 2003, defendant filed the present motion to compel arbitration and stay proceedings pursuant to the Federal Arbitration Act (the “FAA”). The arbitration agreement that defendant wishes to enforce was signed by plaintiff on July 22, 2000 and reads…

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.