Ramirez

Ramirez v. Pacific Bay Masonry CA1/2

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 27, 2022A163316California4,940 words

Opinion

Opinion

BACKGROUND

Ramirez worked as a mason for Pacific Bay from 2017 to 2019. Naranjo also worked for Pacific Bay during the same time period as a hod carrier. A. Arbitration Agreement At the start of their employment, Ramirez and Naranjo each signed an “Employment, Confidential Information, and Arbitration Agreement” (Agreement). Section 9 of the Agreement is entitled “Arbitration and Equitable Relief” and provides, in relevant part: “COMPANY AND I

BOTH AGREE THAT ANY AND ALL DISPUTES, CLAIMS, OR CAUSES

OF ACTION, IN LAW OR EQUITY, ARISING FROM OR RELATING TO

THE ENFORCEMENT, BREACH, PERFORMANCE . . . OF THIS

AGREEMENT, OUR EMPLOYMENT RELATIONSHIP, OR THE

TERMINATION OF OUR EMPLOYMENT RELATIONSHIP SHALL BE

RESOLVED, TO THE FULLEST EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW, BY

FINAL, BINDING AND CONFIDENTIAL ARBITRATION IN SANTA

CLARA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA CONDUCTED BEFORE A SINGLE

ARBITRATOR BY JAMS, INC. (‘JAMS’) OR ITS SUCCESSOR, UNDER THE

2 THEN APPLICABLE JAMS RULES.” It continues: “BY AGREEING TO

THIS ARBITRATION PROCEDURE, BOTH PARTIES WAIVE THE RIGHT

TO RESOLVE ANY SUCH DISPUTE THROUGH A TRIAL BY JURY OR

JUDGE OR BY ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDING.”

The Agreement states that the arbitration…

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.