Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
N.D. Cal.Procedural orderFiled Feb. 17, 2021

Slade v. Empire Today, LLC

Judge
Yvonne Rogers
Docket
4:20-cv-09301
Court
U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
Pages
2
ArbitrationCivil ProcedureContract
In one sentence

In Slade v. Empire Today, Judge Rogers denied arbitration without prejudice because contract formation remained factually disputed and allowed limited discovery.

Who this affects

Jeul Slade and Empire Today, LLC; the order permits limited discovery about whether an arbitration agreement was formed and leaves open a renewed motion to compel arbitration.

What happened

In Slade v. Empire Today, LLC, Empire Today asked the court to require Jeul Slade to arbitrate his claims and dismiss the case with prejudice.

The court denied the request to compel arbitration without prejudice because the evidence showed a material dispute about whether an arbitration agreement was formed. The parties may take limited discovery on that issue.

Judge Yvonne Rogers required Empire Today to file a renewed arbitration motion, or the parties to file a joint statement about how to proceed, by May 28, 2021, with a compliance deadline of June 4, 2021.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Slade v. Empire Today, LLC · No. 4:20-cv-09301
Judge
Yvonne Rogers
Date
Feb. 17, 2021

Background

Empire Today, LLC moved to compel Jeul Slade to arbitrate his claims and to dismiss the action with prejudice. The motion was heard by videoconference on February 16, 2021.

Court’s analysis

Applying the standard used for motions that resemble summary-judgment proceedings, the court found a material dispute of fact about whether the parties formed an agreement to arbitrate. Because Empire Today had not established the existence of such an agreement on the current record, the court did not reach Slade’s arguments concerning whether the agreement was unconscionable or whether his claims were exempt from the Federal Arbitration Act. The court stated that those arguments did not persuade it on the existing record, but explained that it was not deciding them because the agreement’s existence had not been established.

The court also noted that Slade had filed separate objections to Empire Today’s evidence, contrary to a local rule requiring evidentiary and procedural objections to appear in the motion brief. The court did not consider that separate filing.

Ruling and next steps

The court denied the motion to compel arbitration without prejudice. It granted the parties leave to take limited discovery only on contract formation. By May 28, 2021, Empire Today had to file either a renewed motion to compel arbitration or, alternatively, the parties had to file a joint statement explaining how they wished to proceed. The court set June 4, 2021, as the compliance deadline and terminated Docket No. 10.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.