Regional Care of Jacksonville, LLC v. Henry
444 S.W.3d 356
Ark.2014Background
- Lucille Betncourt resided at Woodland Hills eight separate times from Jan 2008 to Dec 2012;
- Betncourt signed multiple admission agreements containing arbitration clauses (2008–2010), with Henry later signing four as the 'Responsible Party' (2011–2012);
- The arbitration clause provides that most disputes must be resolved by binding arbitration under FAA with state-law substance and federal procedure rules;
- Sixteen agreements include a broad arbitration clause that excludes only billing/collection disputes from arbitration;
- Henry filed a negligence, malpractice, contract, and consumer-protection complaint against Woodland Hills;
- The circuit court denied Woodland Hills’ motion to dismiss and compel arbitration; this appeal followed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Is there mutuality of obligation in the arbitration clause? | Betncourt estate argues no mutuality; Woodland Hills would arbitrate its own claims but sue residents. | Woodland Hills contends mutuality exists and Henry had authority to bind Betncourt. | Mutuality lacking; clause unenforceable. |
Key Cases Cited
- Buckeye Check Cashing, Inc. v. Cardegna, 546 U.S. 440 (U.S. 2006) (FAA preempts state law but validates arbitration agreements as a general matter; threshold validity inquiry.)
- DIRECTV, Inc. v. Murray, 2012 Ark. 366 (Ark. 2012) (State contract law governs validity of arbitration agreements under FAA.)
- Alltel Corp. v. Sumner, 360 Ark. 573, 203 S.W.3d 77 (Ark. 2005) (Elements of an enforceable arbitration agreement; mutuality and mutual obligation.)
- Tyson Foods, Inc. v. Archer, 356 Ark. 136, 147 S.W.3d 681 (Ark. 2004) (Arbitration lacked mutuality where employer retained remedies in court.)
- E-Z Cash Advance, Inc. v. Harris, 347 Ark. 132, 60 S.W.3d 436 (Ark. 2001) (Not enforceable when one side retains exclusive litigation rights while the other is limited to arbitration.)
- Showmethemoney Check Cashers, Inc. v. Williams, 342 Ark. 112, 27 S.W.3d 361 (Ark. 2000) (Mutuality required; one-sided arbitration provisions are unenforceable.)
- Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. v. Walker, 2014 Ark. 223, 434 S.W.3d 357 (Ark. 2014) (Elements of a valid arbitration agreement under Arkansas law.)
- Newby v. Asset Acceptance, LLC, 2014 Ark. 280, S.W.3d (Ark. 2014) (Appeal of denial to compel arbitration; de novo review on record.)