Jones v. Kaiser Foundation Health Plan

Filed 4/6/07 Jones v. Kaiser Foundation Health Plan CA4/3

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION THREE

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Orange County, Corey S. Cramin, Judge. Affirmed.

Rima Jones, in pro. per., for Plaintiff and Appellant.

Gittler & Bradford and Jacob M. Wiesel for Defendant and Respondent.

* * *

Plaintiff Rima Jones sued defendant Kaiser Foundation Health Plan, Inc. for medical malpractice and 23 other causes of action. The trial court granted defendants petition to compel arbitration. Following the arbitration, plaintiff filed a motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict, which the court rejected and took off calendar. The court subsequently dismissed the action. Plaintiff appeals, contending this was error. We disagree and affirm.

DISCUSSION

Code of Civil Procedure section 1281.2 provides, On petition of a party to an arbitration agreement alleging the existence of a written agreement to arbitrate a controversy and that a party thereto refuses to arbitrate such controversy, the court shall order the petitioner and the respondent to arbitrate the controversy if it determines that an agreement to arbitrate the controversy exists, unless it determines that: [] (a) The right to compel arbitration has been waived by the petitioner; or [] (b) Grounds exist for the revocation of the agreement.

Under this statute, the petitioner bears the burden of establishing the existence of a valid agreement to arbitrate, and a party opposing the petition bears the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence any fact necessary to its defense. [Citation.] The trial court sits as a trier of fact, weighing all the affidavits, declarations, and other documentary evidence, as well as oral testimony received at the courts discretion, to reach a final determination on the issue of arbitrability. [Citation.]

(Banner Entertainment, Inc. v. Superior Court (1998) 62 Cal.App.4th 348, 356-357.) On appeal, we will affirm the trial courts determination a valid agreement to arbitrate exists if substantial evidence supports that determination. (Id. at p. 357.)

Once a court grants the petition to compel arbitration and stays the action at law, the action at law sits in the twilight zone of abatement with the trial court retaining merely a vestigial jurisdiction over matters submitted to arbitration. This vestigial jurisdiction over the action at law consists solely of making the determination, upon conclusion of the arbitration proceedings, of whether there was an award on the merits (in which case the action at law should be dismissed because of the res judicata effects of the arbitration award [citations] or not (at which point the action at law may resume to determine the rights of the parties). [Citations.] (Brock v. Kaiser Foundation Hospitals 10 Cal.App.4th 1790, 1796.)

Here, the record shows a written agreement to arbitrate exists and covered plaintiffs 24 causes of action, all of which arise out of her medical malpractice claims. Plaintiff did not meet her burden of showing the arbitration clause was invalid. Accordingly, the trial court properly granted defendants petition to compel arbitration. The arbitration was held and the arbitrator ruled in favor of defendant. Because that award is conclusive on matters of fact and law and all matters in the award are res judicata (Division of Labor Standards Enforcement v. Williams (1981) 121 Cal.App.3d 302, 309), the court did not err in dismissing plaintiffs action. (Brock v. Kaiser Foundation Hospitals, supra, 10 Cal.App.4th at p. 1796.)

DISPOSITION

The judgment is affirmed. Defendant shall recover its costs on appeal.

RYLAARSDAM, J.

WE CONCUR:

SILLS, P. J.

ARONSON, J.

Publication Courtesy of California lawyer directory.

Analysis and review provided by Escondido Property line attorney.