Primmer v. Healthcare Industries Corp.
43 N.E.3d 788
Ohio Ct. App.2015Background
- John Primmer executed a VA durable power of attorney for health care appointing his daughter Pamela McCathern to make health-care decisions if he could not.
- After Primmer became incompetent he was admitted to Hickory Creek Nursing Center; McCathern signed the admission paperwork and an arbitration agreement on his behalf.
- The arbitration agreement waived the resident’s right to jury/court trial and required binding arbitration for claims (negligence, malpractice, etc.); Hickory Creek’s staff admitted arbitration was not required for care.
- Primmer sued Hickory Creek asserting negligence, medical malpractice, and premises-liability claims arising from his residency.
- Hickory Creek moved to stay proceedings and compel arbitration, arguing McCathern had authority under the health-care POA and had apparent authority; the trial court denied the motion.
- The Fourth District affirmed, holding the POA did not authorize waiver of litigation rights (arbitration is a legal, not a health-care, decision) and McCathern lacked apparent authority.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the durable health-care power of attorney authorized agent to sign arbitration agreement | Primmer: POA only authorizes health-care decisions; arbitration is not a health-care decision, so agent lacked authority | Hickory Creek: POA authorized agent to make health-care decisions including admissions/discharges, which implies authority to sign arbitration included in admission packet | Held that arbitration waiver is a legal decision, not a health-care decision under R.C. definitions; POA did not authorize signing arbitration agreement |
| Whether Hickory Creek reasonably relied on McCathern’s apparent authority to bind Primmer | Primmer: No evidence he held her out as having authority to sign arbitration; he was incompetent and did not participate | Hickory Creek: Agent signed admission paperwork and other documents; nursing home reasonably believed she had authority | Held no apparent authority: principal’s acts did not clothe agent with authority, nursing home’s belief was not reasonable given POA limits and arbitration was optional for admission |
Key Cases Cited
- Hayes v. Oakridge Home, 122 Ohio St.3d 63 (2009) (states strong public policy favoring arbitration)
- Taylor Bldg. Corp. of Am. v. Benfield, 117 Ohio St.3d 352 (2008) (de novo review applies to legal questions about arbitration agreements)
- Master Consol. Corp. v. BancOhio Natl. Bank, 61 Ohio St.3d 570 (1991) (elements for apparent agency/principal held out agent)
- Dickerson v. Maryland, 414 Md. 419 (2010) (arbitration agreement optional to care is a legal decision, not a health-care decision)
- Johnson v. Kindred Healthcare, Inc., 466 Mass. 779 (2014) (majority view: health-care agent lacks authority to bind principal to arbitration when optional)
- State ex rel. AMFM, LLC v. King, 740 S.E.2d 66 (W.Va. 2013) (optional arbitration provision is not a health-care decision under the state health-care decisions act)