Quinn

INTRODUCTION

Latisha R. Quinn brought a representative action against her former employer, Dolgen California, LLC (Dolgen) in which she sought the recovery of penalties under the Private Attorney General Act of 2004 (PAGA) (Labor Code, § 2698 et seq.) for several Labor Code violations allegedly suffered by her and other employees. Following Iskanian v. CLS Transportation Los Angeles, LLC (2014) 59 Cal.4th 348 (Iskanian) and its progeny, the trial court denied Dolgen’s motion to compel the arbitration of the “individual” portion of Quinn’s PAGA claim for Labor Code violations she herself had allegedly suffered. (See Kim v. Reins International California, Inc. (2020) 9 Cal.5th 73, 88 (Kim) [California “[a]ppellate courts have rejected efforts to split PAGA claims into individual and representative components”].) During the pendency of this appeal, the United States Supreme Court decided Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana (2022) 596 U.S. __, __ [142 S.Ct. 1906, 1924] (Viking), in which it held that the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) (9 U.S.C. § 1 et seq.) preempts the rule of Iskanian “insofar as it precludes division of PAGA actions into individual and non-individual claims…