Reyes v. Macy's, Inc.
202 Cal. App. 4th 1119
| Cal. Ct. App. | 2011Background
- Felicia Reyes, plaintiff and respondent, moved to dismiss Macy’s appeal of an order allowing arbitration of Reyes’ individual claims but staying class and PAGA claims.
- The trial court granted Macy’s motion to compel arbitration of Reyes’ individual claims and stayed/dismissed or stayed class and PAGA claims pending arbitration.
- Reyes’ second amended complaint asserts overtime, expense reimbursement, wage order, and civil penalties under PAGA, plus discrimination, harassment, and retaliation claims under FEHA.
- Macy’s petitioned to compel arbitration on an individual basis, dismiss class allegations, and stay the action until arbitration concludes.
- The appellate issue presented is whether any portion of the order is appealable given the arbitration statute and finality requirements.
- Court holds none of the order’s provisions are appealable at this stage; the appeal is granted to dismiss.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Is the order appealable for arbitration of individual claims? | Reyes | Macy’s | No; order to compel arbitration is not appealable. |
| Can the denial/dismissal of class and PAGA claims be appealed? | Reyes | Macy’s | No; order is interlocutory and not a final judgment. |
| Is the PAGA claim individual or representative for arbitration purposes? | PAGA is not individual; represents state enforcement | PAGA claims could be arbitrated or dismissed | PAGA claims are representative-only; not subject to individual arbitration. |
| Does Machado/Quevedo affect whether PAGA can be asserted individually? | PAGA could permit individual-like relief | Machado/Quevedo support individual claims | Machado/Quevedo do not permit individual PAGA claims; reaffirmed. |
| What is the overall appellate result on Macy’s appeal? | Appeal should proceed | Appeal should be dismissed | Motion to dismiss appeal granted; no appealable issues. |
Key Cases Cited
- Abramson v. Juniper Networks, Inc., 115 Cal.App.4th 638 (Cal. Ct. App. 2004) (arbitration orders are not appealable)
- Gordon v. G.R.O.U.P., Inc., 49 Cal.App.4th 998 (Cal. Ct. App. 1996) (as to appealability of arbitration orders)
- Zembsch v. Superior Court, 146 Cal.App.4th 153 (Cal. Ct. App. 2006) (denial or dismissal of arbitration-related orders appealable)
- Griset v. Fair Political Practices Com., 25 Cal.4th 688 (Cal. 2001) (one final judgment rule; interlocutory orders not appealed)
- Brown v. Ralphs Grocery Co., 197 Cal.App.4th 489 (Cal. Ct. App. 2011) (PAGA relief largely for public, not individual)
- Arias v. Superior Court, 46 Cal.4th 969 (Cal. 2009) (PAGA acts as private attorney general, not individual claimant)
- Quevedo v. Macy’s, Inc., 798 F.Supp.2d 1122 (C.D. Cal. 2011) (PAGA not amenable to individual action)