Avila v. S. Cal. Specialty Care, Inc.
20 Cal. App. 5th 835
| Cal. Ct. App. 5th | 2018Background
- Antonio (age 87) was admitted to Kindred long-term acute care in March 2015 and died within five days; plaintiffs allege neglect leading to aspiration and death.
- Alex, Antonio’s son and agent under a 2007 statutory power of attorney, signed a facility "Voluntary ADR Agreement" on Antonio’s behalf the day after admission.
- The ADR agreement required mediation then arbitration under California law and stated it covered claims "brought by a party other than you (e.g., ... agent, heir)."
- Plaintiffs sued for negligence/willful misconduct, elder abuse/neglect (both on behalf of Antonio and Alex) and wrongful death (Alex individually).
- Kindred petitioned to compel arbitration of all claims; the trial court denied the petition, holding Alex’s wrongful death claim was not subject to arbitration and, under Code Civ. Proc. §1281.2(c), refused to enforce arbitration for the remaining claims because of the risk of inconsistent rulings.
- Defendants appealed; the appellate court affirmed the denial of the motion to compel arbitration.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether MICRA §1295 binds Alex’s wrongful death claim to arbitration | Alex: wrongful death claim pleads elder abuse/neglect (not MICRA professional negligence), so §1295/Ruiz inapplicable | Kindred: Ruiz allows heirs to be bound under §1295; wrongful death should be arbitrable | Held: §1295 does not apply because complaint primarily pleads elder abuse/neglect; Ruiz inapplicable |
| Whether Alex (signing as agent) agreed personally to arbitrate his wrongful death claim | Alex: signed only as agent for Antonio, no personal intent to waive jury/right to litigate | Kindred: signature on ADR (which references heirs/agents) binds Alex | Held: No agreement to arbitrate Alex’s independent wrongful death claim; agent signature did not show personal consent |
| Whether the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) preempts state law preventing court from denying arbitration under §1281.2(c) | Alex: state procedures apply; §1281.2(c) may be used to refuse arbitration to avoid conflicting rulings | Kindred: FAA applies and forbids application of §1281.2(c) to deny arbitration | Held: FAA procedural rules do not apply here (agreement invoked California law); §1281.2(c) valid and applicable |
| Whether the trial court abused discretion in refusing to compel arbitration of remaining claims under §1281.2(c) due to risk of inconsistent rulings | Alex: risk of conflicting rulings between arbitrated survivorship claims and litigated wrongful death supports refusal | Kindred: public policy favors arbitration; court should compel arbitration | Held: No abuse of discretion; the three §1281.2(c) requirements are met and risk of inconsistent rulings justified denying enforcement |
Key Cases Cited
- Ruiz v. Podolsky, 50 Cal.4th 838 (Cal. 2010) (MICRA §1295 can bind heirs to arbitration when claims sound in medical malpractice)
- Daniels v. Sunrise Senior Living, Inc., 212 Cal.App.4th 674 (Cal. Ct. App. 2013) (agent’s signature does not bind agent personally to arbitrate independent wrongful death claims)
- Fitzhugh v. Granada Healthcare & Rehabilitation Center, LLC, 150 Cal.App.4th 469 (Cal. Ct. App. 2007) (signing as legal representative/agent does not show personal assent to arbitrate wrongful death claim)
- Cronus Investments, Inc. v. Concierge Services, 35 Cal.4th 376 (Cal. 2005) (state arbitration law governs procedures in state court absent express FAA choice)
- Volt Info. Sciences, Inc. v. Board of Trustees, 489 U.S. 468 (U.S. 1989) (parties may choose to have arbitration governed by state law; FAA does not automatically displace state procedural rules)
- Acquire II, Ltd. v. Colton Real Estate Group, 213 Cal.App.4th 959 (Cal. Ct. App. 2013) (discussing §1281.2(c) standards for denying arbitration to avoid conflicting rulings)
- Moncharsh v. Heily & Blase, 3 Cal.4th 1 (Cal. 1992) (California policy favoring arbitration but requiring consent)
- Goldman v. SunBridge Healthcare, LLC, 220 Cal.App.4th 1160 (Cal. Ct. App. 2013) (strong policy favoring arbitration does not bind nonconsenting parties)