Searcy Healthcare Ctr. LLC v. Murphy, 2013 Ark. 463

John Wesley Murphy signed a voluntary arbitration agreement with Searcy Healthcare Center (SHC) on Jan. 8, 2010; he had a 30-day revocation period and signing was not a condition of admission.
Murphy resided at SHC Jan. 7–29, 2010, and died Feb. 12, 2010.
On Jan. 11, 2011, John Murphy (administrator of the decedent’s estate) sued SHC for nursing-home malpractice and wrongful death on behalf of statutory beneficiaries.
SHC moved to stay proceedings and compel arbitration based on the decedent’s arbitration agreement; the circuit court denied arbitration as to wrongful-death beneficiaries, finding the decedent had not extinguished their substantive rights.
The circuit court found the decedent competent, the agreement unconscionable, and that the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) governed; SHC appealed the denial, and Murphy cross-appealed the FAA and competency rulings.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Murphy)	Defendant's Argument (SHC)	Held
Whether wrongful-death beneficiaries are bound by decedent’s arbitration agreement	Wrongful-death claim is separate; beneficiaries have independent rights and may sue despite decedent’s arbitration agreement	Wrongful-death claim is derivative of decedent’s claim; beneficiaries stand in decedent’s shoes and are bound by his arbitration agreement	Court reversed: beneficiaries are bound; arbitration agreement applies to wrongful-death claims and case remanded to compel arbitration
Whether FAA governs the arbitration agreement	(Cross-appeal) FAA did not govern	(SHC) FAA governs and arbitration agreement should be enforced under FAA	Dismissed on cross-appeal as not ripe in this interlocutory appeal (issue not cognizable here)
Whether decedent was competent to agree to arbitration	(Cross-appeal) Decedent lacked competency; agreement invalid	(SHC) Decedent was competent; agreement valid	Dismissed on cross-appeal as not ripe in this interlocutory appeal
Whether all named defendants are parties to the arbitration agreement	Beneficiaries argued some defendants not bound	SHC pointed to agreement language binding employees, managers, officers, parent/subsidiaries, successors; complaint alleges defendants acted through SHC	Court found arbitration agreement language and complaint allegations support resolving doubts in favor of arbitration; beneficiaries cannot avoid arbitration on that basis

Estate of Hull v. Union Pac. R.R. Co., 355 Ark. 547, 141 S.W.3d 356 (2004) (wrongful-death action is derivative of decedent’s claim; beneficiaries’ rights are subject to limitations binding the decedent)
Brown v. Pine Bluff Nursing Home, 359 Ark. 471, 199 S.W.3d 45 (2004) (wrongful-death beneficiaries barred where decedent’s action was previously dismissed or settled)
England v. Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc., 306 Ark. 225, 811 S.W.2d 313 (1991) (orders compelling arbitration are not immediately appealable)