March 31, 2022

Aronow v. Superior Court of San Francisco County (March 28, 2022, A162662)

After the trial court granted defendants’ motion to compel arbitration and stay court proceedings, plaintiff moved for a waiver of arbitration fees and costs or for a lifting of the stay because he was unable to pay the fees. The trial court denied the motion but certified to the Court of Appeal the question whether it had jurisdiction to lift a stay of court proceedings under such circumstances.

Acknowledging a split of authority on the issue, the Court of Appeal answered yes and followed Roldan v. Callahan & Blaine (2013) 219 Cal.App.4th 87, noting that the Supreme Court had approved the rationale of Roldan in Jameson v. Desta (2018) 5 Cal.5th 594. As in Roldan, the Court of Appeal held that when the party opposing arbitration demonstrates financial inability to pay anticipated arbitration costs, the trial court may lift a stay of court proceedings and require the party seeking arbitration to either pay the opposing party’s share of arbitration costs or waive the right to arbitrate.

The court also held that before determining a party’s ability to pay, the party seeking arbitration may conduct limited discovery regarding the opposing party’s financial circumstances.