While California law embraces and supports private arbitration agreements (see, Rosenthal v. Great Western Financial Securities Corporation (1996) 14 Cal.4th 394 ("Rosenthal"); see also, Code of Civil Procedure ยง 1281.2), disputes often arise over whether there is, in fact, an agreement to arbitrate. A recent employment case, Hope Gamboa v. Northeast Community Clinic (2021) Westlaw 5575536 ("Gamboa case"), demonstrates that a Petition for Arbitration may be denied even if the signed Arbitration Agreement is put before the Trial Court.
In the Gamboa case, the Northeast Community Clinic hired Hope Gamboa as a scanner. As a condition of beginning her employment, Gamboa signed several "onboarding documents." In July 2018, Gamboa sustained an injury to her hand that affected her work. After Gamboa requested medical accommodations, the clinic terminated her employment. In July 2019, Gamboa sued the clinic for multiple causes of action relating to her employment including discrimination, retaliation, and failure to provide reasonable accommodations.
In August 2019, the Clinic filed a Motion to Compel Arbitration. The Clinic argued that Gamboa had signed an Arbitration Agreement as part of her required onboarding documents. In support of the Motion to Compel, the Clinic filed a Declaration by a Marina Lopez who stated she was the Director of Human Resources for the Clinic. Lopez attached the Arbitration Agreement as an exhibit to her Declaration. The Arbitration Agreement appeared to be signed by a representative of the Clinic and an employee (the representative of the Clinic did not appear to be Lopez).
Thereafter, Gamboa opposed the Motion on two grounds. Gamboa claimed that the Clinic did not establish it had a valid Arbitration Agreement and that the Arbitration Agreement was unconscionable and unenforceable. Gamboa filed a Declaration in support of her Opposition stating she reviewed the Arbitration Agreement attached to Lopez' Declaration and did not "remember these documents at all." She stated if she had known about the Arbitration Agreement and been told about its provisions, she would not have signed it. In reply, the Clinic argued that Gamboa's failure to remember the Arbitration Agreement did not invalidate it. The Clinic did not file a supplemental Declaration.
In February 2020, at a hearing during which no evidence or testimony was submitted, the Trial Court denied the Motion to Compel Arbitration.