Legal Rationale Forming The Basis For The Trial Court’s Ruling Has Been Abrogated By Iskanian.
The California Supreme Court held in Iskanian v. CLS Transportation Los Angeles, LLC, 59 Cal.4th 348 (2014) that Gentry v. Superior Court had been abrogated by the SCOTUS decision in AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion, 563 U.S. __ [131 S.Ct. 1740] (2011). Gentry had established a four-factor test for determining whether a class action waiver in an employee-employer contract arbitration was valid.
Iskanian is having a significant impact on pending cases in which a class action waiver in connection with arbitration was invalidated by a trial court. The latest example of this impact is Mahmud v. Ralphs Grocery Company, B237636 (2/4 Nov. 10, 2014) (Manella, Epstein, Willhite) (unpublished), in which the Court of appeal holds, ‘[a]s the legal rationale that formed the basis for the trial court’s ruling [i.e., Gentry] has been abrogated [i.e., by Iskanian] and Mahmud presented no other basis for denial of the petition to compel, we reverse.” As a consequence, the trial court order denying the employer’s petition to compel arbitration was reversed.