Gentry v. Superior Court

Full title: ROBERT GENTRY, Petitioner, v. THE SUPERIOR COURT OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY…

Court: California Court of Appeals, Second District, Fifth Division

Date published: Dec 13, 2007

No. B169805 (Cal. Ct. App. Dec. 13, 2007)

Opinion

ROBERT GENTRY, Petitioner, v. THE SUPERIOR COURT OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY, Respondent CIRCUIT CITY STORES, INC., Real Party in Interest. B169805 California Court of Appeal, Second District, Fifth Division December 13, 2007

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BC280631

Righetti & Wynne, Matthew Righetti and John Glugoski, Law Offices of Ellen Lake for Petitioner.

No appearance for Respondent.

Berry & Block, Rex Darrell Berry and Scott M. Plamondon for Real Party in Interest.

ARMSTRONG, J.

This original proceeding is before us on a remand from the California Supreme Court. (Gentry v. Superior Court (2007) 42 Cal.4th 443, 473.) Pursuant to the mandate of the Supreme Court, the petition is granted and the cause is remanded to the trial court for further proceedings for a determination of whether the class arbitration waiver is void. Unless the issue is mooted, the trial court must also determine on remand whether the original 1995 arbitration agreement or an amended agreement controls the present case and whether the controlling agreement has substantively unconscionable terms. If so, the court must determine whether these terms should be severed, or whether instead the arbitration agreement as a whole should be invalidated. (Id. at pp. 472-473.)

The interests of justice are best served by each side bearing its own costs in this original proceeding.

We concur: TURNER, P. J., KRIEGLER, J.