Valdez

Valdez v. Tesla CA1/4

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 24, 2021A160610California3,757 words

Opinion

Opinion

Filed 9/24/21 Valdez v. Tesla CA1/

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION FOUR

BRANDON VALDEZ,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

A160610, A160922

v. TESLA, INC. et al., (Alameda County Super. Ct. No. RG20049344) Defendants and Appellants.

When plaintiff Brandon Valdez brought this employment discrimination action against his former employer, Tesla, Inc. (Tesla), and his supervisor Caleb Moore, defendants moved to compel arbitration, contending Valdez electronically signed an arbitration agreement when he accepted his job offer. The trial court denied their motions on the ground defendants did not establish the authenticity of the electronic signature. We conclude that the trial court misapplied the shifting burdens applicable to motions to compel…

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.