![]() Sub–Carrier will not be treated as an employee of Prime Carrier for any purpose, statutory or otherwise․” Thus, according to the terms of the Agreement, plaintiff was an independent contractor and not an employee. The Agreement also provides: “By this Agreement, Sub–Carrier and Prime Carrier acknowledge and agree that there does not exist between them the relationship of employer/employee ․ either express or implied. ![]() 1 The Agreement provides for binding arbitration of “any controversy or claim between the parties arising out of or relating to this Agreement or any alleged breach hereof, including any issues ․ that this Agreement or any part hereof is invalid, illegal, or otherwise voidable or void․” Plaintiff entered into an Owner–Operator Sub–Carrier Agreement (Agreement) with defendant Rideshare Port Management, LLC, doing business as Prime Time Shuttle, LLC. Plaintiff picked up and dropped off people primarily at LAX. From about June 2009 until June 2012, plaintiff worked for defendants as an airport shuttle van driver. PacifiCare of California (2003) 31 Cal.4th 1187, 1203.) We reverse the trial court's order denying the petition to compel arbitration and remand the case to the trial court with instructions to enter an order compelling arbitration of all of plaintiff's claims.ĭefendants own and operate an airport charter transport business. Plaintiff cannot demonstrate prejudice from the delay, which is determinative. We also conclude defendants did not waive their right to arbitration even though they waited 14 months after the complaint was filed to move to compel arbitration. § 1 et seq.) applies to the parties' arbitration agreement, and all of plaintiff's claims are arbitrable. We find the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA 9 U.S.C. (Prime Time), Rideshare Airport Management, LLC, formerly known as Rideshare Port Management, LLC, and Rattan Joea appeal a trial court order denying their motion to compel arbitration of claims based on the alleged misclassification of plaintiff Valo Khalatian as an independent contractor rather than an employee. Law Office of Tony Forberg and Tony Forberg for Plaintiff and Respondent.ĭefendants Prime Time Shuttle, Inc. B255945 Decided: May 15, 2015Įpstein Becker & Green, David Jacobs, William O. Valo KHALATIAN, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. Court of Appeal, Second District, Division 8, California.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |