Daily eBriefs - February 3, 2025

Sanchez v. Superior Court (Consumer Defense Legal Group) A party’s inability to pay arbitral fees and costs can preclude enforceability of an arbitration agreement because the high fees and costs would render the agreement unconscionable. A party may be relieved from an order compelling arbitration due to the party’s inability to afford to initiate or continue arbitration proceedings. Sanchez v. Superior Court (Consumer Defense Legal Group) - filed Feb. 3, 2025, Fourth District, Div. Three Cite as 2025 S.O.S. 334 Full text click here >http://sos.metnews.com/sos.cgi?0225//G064490 Casey v. Superior Court (D.R. Horton) - filed Feb. 3, 2025, First District, Div. One The Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act preempts attempts under state law to compel arbitration of cases relating to a sexual harassment dispute, and parties cannot contract around the law by way of a choice-of-law provision. Casey v. Superior Court (D.R. Horton) - filed Feb. 3, 2025, First District, Div. One Cite as 2025 S.O.S. 338 Full text click here >http://sos.metnews.com/sos.cgi?0225//A170650 Murphy v. AAA Auto Insurance of Southern California - filed Jan. 24, 2025, publication ordered Jan. 31, 2025, Fourth District, Div. Three A coverage exclusion for collision damage occurring while a car is being operated to transport property in exchange for compensation applies to both independent contractors and drivers employed to transport property; this exclusion does not contravene Labor Code §2802 or violate public policy. Murphy v. AAA Auto Insurance of Southern California - filed Jan. 24, 2025, publication ordered Jan. 31, 2025, Fourth District, Div. Three Cite as 2025 S.O.S. 345 Full text click here >http://sos.metnews.com/sos.cgi?0225//G063742 Nabors Corporate Services v. City of Long Beach - filed Jan. 31, 2025, Second District, Div. Five A federal district court is a court within the meaning of Labor Code §1781; an order and judgment confirming an arbitrator’s award is plainly a decision of a court for purposes of indemnity under the plain meaning of §1781; §1784 does not merely clarify preexisting rights or expand remedies based on preexisting duties; it creates new rights to indemnity based on conduct by hiring parties that did not support them prior to its enactment. Nabors Corporate Services v. City of Long Beach - filed Jan. 31, 2025, Second District, Div. Five Cite as 2025 S.O.S. 348 Full text click here >http://sos.metnews.com/sos.cgi?0225//B328026.