Mondragon

Mondragon v. Santa Ana Healthcare & Wellness Centre CA2/1

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 28, 2021B307872California3,388 words

Opinion

Opinion

BACKGROUND

From December 18, 2017 to April 3, 2019, Mondragon was employed by Santa Ana as a nurse and medication technician. Throughout her employment Mondragon worked at Country Villa Plaza, a skilled nursing facility operated by Santa Ana.1 On December 18, 2017, as a condition of her employment, Mondragon signed an agreement to be bound by an alternative dispute resolution (ADR) policy (the Arbitration Agreement).2 A. The Arbitration Agreement The ADR policy states, in relevant part: “The ADR [p]olicy will be mandatory for ALL DISPUTES ARISING BETWEEN

EMPLOYEES, ON THE ONE HAND, AND YOUR EMPLOYER,

AND/OR ITS EMPLOYEES AND OFFICERS . . . ON THE

OTHER HAND. . . . [¶] For parties covered by this [ADR] [p]olicy, alternative dispute resolution, including final and binding arbitration, is the exclusive means for resolving covered disputes . . . . [¶] . . . [¶] Covered disputes include any dispute arising out of or related to my employment, the terms and conditions of my employment and/or the termination of your employment . . . .” The ADR policy also contained a class action waiver: “I understand and agree this ADR [p]rogram prohibits me from joining or participating in a…

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.