Can an attorney unilaterally bind a plaintiff to arbitration without their client's consent?

[28 Cal.App.4th 1557] The concurring opinion in Blanton v. Womancare Inc., supra, 38 Cal.3d at p. 409, 212 Cal.Rptr. 151, 696 P.2d 645, lamented the failure of the majority to set forth specific guidelines as to when attorneys may act without the express consent of their clients. It also pointed out that by stipulating to binding arbitration without his client's knowledge or consent, the attorney had effectively waived his client's right to a jury trial, and commented extensively on this action: "The right to trial by jury, in both civil and criminal matters, is a basic and fundamental part of our system of jurisprudence. [Citations.] It is a historically important right, which has been called the principal bulwark of our liberties. [Citations.] ... [p] ... The right to a jury trial is fundamental and should be zealously guarded by the courts. [Citations.] In case of doubt ..., the issue should be resolved in favor of preserving a litigant's right to trial by jury.... [p] That right may not be waived by implication, but only affirmatively

Page 347