259 F. Supp. 3d 200
E.D. Pa.2017Background
- Decedent Ola Simmons was admitted to Kindred Hospital; her court-appointed guardian (Yvette Rogers) — a licensed attorney with full authority — signed Kindred’s admissions paperwork including an Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) agreement. John Simmons did not sign.
- Ola suffered pressure sores, weight loss, and infections during prior nursing-home care, was transferred to Kindred, and later died in hospice; John Simmons sued for negligence, wrongful death, survival, and UTPCPL violations against Simpson House, Prime-Roxborough, and Kindred.
- Kindred moved to dismiss and compel arbitration, arguing the ADR signed by Ola’s guardian covers claims brought on behalf of Ola; the court ordered limited discovery on arbitrability and then reviewed Kindred’s renewed motion under summary-judgment standards.
- Simmons argued the ADR was invalid because it named the National Arbitration Forum (NAF), which no longer administers consumer cases, and argued his wrongful-death claim is not subject to arbitration because he did not sign the agreement.
- The court found the ADR’s NAF provisions were permissive (not exclusive) and severable, making the agreement enforceable; it also held the ADR binds claims derived from Ola (survival) but not Simmons’s independent wrongful-death claim.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Validity of ADR given NAF's demise | ADR invalid because NAF no longer operates for consumer claims and NAF rules make arbitration impossible | ADR valid; NAF is nonexclusive and severable; alternate administrator and FAA §5 permit substitution | ADR valid — NAF provisions are nonessential and severable; arbitration agreement enforceable |
| Whether guardian's signature bound Ola to arbitration | Guardian exceeded or improperly bound Ola (implicitly) | Guardian had full authority; signature binds patient under state contract law | Guardian had authority; agreement formed under Pennsylvania contract principles |
| Scope: Do Ola-derived claims (survival) fall under ADR? | Survival claims should not be exempt | ADR covers disputes between patient and hospital, including survival claims | Survival claims subject to arbitration; court dismisses without prejudice (not stayed) |
| Scope: Does plaintiff's wrongful-death claim fall under ADR? | Wrongful-death is derivative of decedent and should be arbitrable | ADR applies to disputes "between Patient and Hospital", arguing wrongful-death arises from same incident | Wrongful-death claim filed by heir is a separate statutory right and not bound by decedent's arbitration agreement; claim remains in court |
Key Cases Cited
- Guidotti v. Legal Helpers Debt Resolution, 716 F.3d 764 (3d Cir. 2013) (standard for deciding motions to compel arbitration and when discovery on arbitrability is appropriate)
- Wert v. ManorCare, 124 A.3d 1248 (Pa. 2015) (NAF-incorporated arbitration agreements may be invalid when NAF participation is integral)
- MacPherson v. Magee Mem'l Hosp. for Convalescence, 128 A.3d 1209 (Pa. Super. 2015) (distinguishing Wert; NAF references may be severable when nonexclusive)
- Pisano v. Extendicare Homes, Inc., 77 A.3d 651 (Pa. Super. 2013) (arbitration agreements signed by decedent do not bind heirs' wrongful-death claims)
- Moses H. Cone Mem'l Hosp. v. Mercury Constr. Corp., 460 U.S. 1 (U.S. 1983) (FAA requires piecemeal resolution and enforcement of arbitration agreements)
- Trippe Mfg. Co. v. Niles Audio Corp., 401 F.3d 529 (3d Cir. 2005) (apply ordinary state-law contract principles to determine existence and scope of arbitration agreement)