Khalatian
Khalatian v. Prime Time Shuttle CA2/8
Opinion
Concurrence in Part
Flier, J.
Concurring and Dissenting. — Because I conclude the arbitration provision does not encompass all of respondent Valo Khalatian’s causes of action, I write separately. 1 I would affirm in part and reverse in part the trial court’s order denying appellants’ (Prime Time Shuttle, Inc., Rideshare Airport Management, LLC, formerly known as Rideshare Port Management, LLC, and Rattan Joea) petition to compel arbitration.
*664 As the majority explains, Khalatian agreed to arbitrate “any controversy or claim between the parties arising out of or relating to this Agreement or any alleged breach hereof, including any issues . . . that this Agreement or any part hereof is invalid, illegal, or otherwise voidable or void.” Further, as the majority acknowledges, in evaluating a motion to compel arbitration, the threshold issue under both the Federal Arbitration Act ( 9 U.S.C. § 1 et seq.) and under California law is whether the parties have an agreement to arbitrate. (Pinnacle Museum Tower Assn. v. Pinnacle Market Development (US), LLC (2012) 55 Cal.4th 223, 236 [ 145 Cal.Rptr.3d 514 , 282 P.3d 1217 ]; Elijahjuan v. Superior Court (2012) 210 Cal.App.4th 15, 20 [ 147 Cal.Rptr.3d 857 ] (Elijahjuan)…
Opinion
BACKGROUND
Defendants own and operate an airport charter transport business. From about June 2009 until June 2012, plaintiff worked for defendants as an airport shuttle van driver. Plaintiff picked up and dropped off people primarily at LAX. Plaintiff entered into an Owner-Operator Sub-Carrier Agreement (Agreement) with defendant Rideshare Port Management, LLC, doing business as Prime Time Shuttle, LLC.1 The Agreement provides for binding arbitration of “any controversy or claim between the parties arising out of or relating to this Agreement or any alleged breach hereof, including any issues . . . that this Agreement or any part hereof is invalid, illegal, or otherwise voidable or void . . . .” The Agreement also provides: “By this Agreement, Sub-Carrier and Prime Carrier acknowledge and agree that there does not exist between them the relationship of employer/employee . . . either express or implied. Sub-Carrier will not be treated as an
The Agreement identifies the Prime Time entity as a limited liability company at the time the Agreement was executed.
2 employee of Prime Carrier for any purpose, statutory or otherwise . . . .” Thus, according to the terms of the…
Lead Opinion
Grimes, J.
Defendants Prime Time Shuttle, Inc. (Prime Time), Rideshare Airport Management, LLC, formerly known as Rideshare Port Management, LLC, and Rattan Joea appeal a trial court order denying their motion to compel arbitration of claims based on the alleged misclassification of plaintiff Yalo Khalatian as an independent contractor rather than an employee. We find the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA; 9 U.S.C. § 1 et seq.) applies to the parties’ arbitration agreement, and all of plaintiff’s claims are arbitrable. We also conclude defendants did not waive their right to arbitration even though they waited 14 months after the complaint was filed to move to compel arbitration. Plaintiff cannot demonstrate prejudice from the delay, which is determinative. *655 (St. Agnes Medical Center v. PacifiCare of California (2003) 31 Cal.4th 1187 1203 [ 8 Cal.Rptr.3d 517 , 82 P.3d 727 ].) We reverse the trial court’s order denying the petition to compel arbitration and remand the case to the trial court with instructions to enter an order compelling arbitration of all of plaintiff’s claims.
BACKGROUND
Defendants own and operate an airport charter transport business. From about June 2009 until…