Hofer v. Boladian, 2025 WL 1354795 (Cal. Ct. App. 2025)

Plaintiffs in this case initiated litigation against defendants, notwithstanding the existence of binding arbitration agreements between the parties.  For six months following the filing of the litigation, plaintiffs sought two forms of preliminary injunctive relief, opposed a demurrer, propounded more than 700 discovery requests, demanded a jury trial in their case management conference statement, represented they would be litigating substantive motions in court and posted jury fees.  It was not until the opposing party filed a cross-complaint that plaintiffs filed a motion to compel arbitration.  The trial court denied the motion on the ground that plaintiffs’ conduct in the case constituted a waiver under Quach v. California Com. Club, Inc., 16 Cal. 5^th 562 (2024), and the Court of Appeal affirmed.  See also Ford v. The Silver F, Inc., 110 Cal. App. 5^th 553 (2025) (motion to compel arbitration of individual PAGA claim was properly denied because the arbitration agreement specifically excluded all PAGA claims); Sanders v. Superior Court, 2025 WL 1303386 (Cal. Ct. App. 2025) (statute requiring payment of arbitration fees within 30 days (Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 1281.98) is not preempted by the Federal Arbitration Act).