Plaintiff Craig Stoker was employed by defendant Blue Origin, LLC from 2020 to 2022. After he was terminated, Stoker sued Blue Origin and others (collectively, Blue Origin) for a variety of employment claims, including sexual harassment in violation of the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA; Gov. Code, § 12900 et seq.). Blue Origin moved to compel arbitration of Stoker’s claims under a contractual arbitration agreement, and Stoker opposed the motion, urging that the complaint alleged a “sexual harassment dispute” within the meaning of the federal Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act of 2021 (EFAA; 9 U.S.C. § 402, subd. (a)), and the arbitration provision was substantively and procedurally unconscionable. The trial court concluded that the EFAA applied, and thus Stoker could not be compelled to arbitrate his claims. Blue Origin appealed.
We affirm. As we discuss, the arbitration agreement is substantively and procedurally unconscionable, and severance is not appropriate in this case. We therefore affirm the order denying the motion to compel arbitration without considering the applicability of the EFAA to Stoker’s claims.
There are 0 comments