Strait v. Compass Group USA CA2/6

── Strait v. Compass Group USA CA2/6 ── Court: California Court of Appeal Date: June 02, 2026 Category: General Filed 6/2/26 Strait v. Compass Group USA CA2/6 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115. IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION SIX LISA SUNNY STRAIT, 2d Civ. No. B346819 (Super. Ct. No. Plaintiff and Respondent, 2024CUWT025279) (Ventura County) v. COMPASS GROUP USA, INC. et al., Defendants and Appellants. Compass Group USA, Inc., Bon Appétit Management Company Foundation, Bon Appétit Management Co. (BAMCO), Richard Maxwell, and Logan De’Bone, collectively appellants, appeal from the denial of their motion to compel arbitration. The trial court found appellants failed to establish that respondent Lisa Sunny Strait electronically signed an arbitration agreement when BAMCO hired her. Because appellants failed to carry their burden of proof and the court did not abuse its discretion in declining an evidentiary hearing, we affirm.  FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY BAMCO is a wholly owned subsidiary of Compass Group USA, Inc. and provides food-service management in thirty-two states. Strait applied for a position with BAMCO on August 17, 2022. BAMCO requires new hires to use “PeopleHub,” a secure online portal, to complete “onboarding” documents including an arbitration agreement. Under that system, each applicant creates a unique username and password and must re-enter that password before electronically signing any document. BAMCO cannot access the employee’s username or password once the account is created, according to BAMCO’s Operations Manager, Sandy Bailey. The system maintains an audit log of every user action with precise timestamps and generates a signed portable document format (PDF) document upon execution. According to Bailey, Strait received a unique onboarding hyperlink on August 30, 2022, at 8:50 a.m., and the audit log reflects that she electronically signed the arbitration agreement at 10:03 a.m. that morning. Strait claims never to have signed the arbitration agreement. She declares that her supervisor, Richard Maxwell, provided her with login credentials that did not work, then called her into his office. Maxwell logged in and completed the onboarding paperwork while Strait sat in his office. Maxwell told her the documents would be provided to her later. They never were. Strait said she had no opportunity to see or review the arbitration agreement. Maxwell acknowledged that he “sat down with [Strait] in [his] office to complete her onboarding,” something he does “with many new hires.” He asserted in general terms that he did not 2 execute any documents on Strait’s behalf. Maxwell did not claim that Strait operated the computer during that session or that she entered her credentials and electronically signed the arbitration agreement. Appellants did not produce any evidence identifying the device or internet protocol (IP) address used to execute the onboarding documents. The trial court denied the motion to compel arbitration. It found that the documents were executed in Maxwell’s office on his computer, which “raises the possibility that someone other than Plaintiff executed the documents, even though Plaintiff’s login credentials had been used.” The court further noted that appellants had not identified the IP address of the computer u