104 So. 3d 1211
Fla. Dist. Ct. App.2012Background
- Figueroa; personal representative of the Estate of Lucy R. Figueroa sues Spring Lake for negligence, wrongful death, fiduciary breaches, and statutory violations.
- Spring Lake sought to compel arbitration under a decedent-arbitration agreement covering contract, tort, statute, and related claims.
- Agreement requires arbitration before a board of three arbitrators chosen from a nationally recognized arbitration association, under FAA; no specific association named.
- Circuit court held the phrase ‘nationally recognized arbitration association’ unambiguous but denied arbitration, signaling impossibility defense.
- Figueroa argued ambiguity and impossibility; Spring Lake argued language unambiguous and impossibility not established.
- Appellate court reviews de novo the arbitration-agreement construction and applies standard to determine whether to compel arbitration.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Is the phrase ‘nationally recognized arbitration association’ ambiguous? | Figueroa argued ambiguity. | Spring Lake argued no ambiguity. | Not ambiguous; error admitting extrinsic evidence; reversible. |
| Does impossibility of performance bar arbitration? | Figueroa contends impossibility defeats enforceability. | Spring Lake contends FAA/Code remedies apply; not impossible. | Impossibility defense fails; FAA allows court to appoint arbitrators; reversible error. |
| Should the circuit court have granted arbitration and remanded? | Arbitration should proceed under FAA; no valid basis to deny. | Arbitration agreement could be void due to impossibility. | Court erred; reverse denial and remand for arbitration consistent with opinion. |
Key Cases Cited
- New Port Richey Med. Investors, LLC v. Stern ex rel. Petscher, 14 So.3d 1084 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009) (arbitration appointment when forum unavailable under FAA and state law)
- SCG Harbourwood, LLC v. Hanyan, 93 So.3d 1197 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012) (de novo review; ambiguous terms; parol evidence limits)
- Wallshein v. Shugarman, 50 So.3d 89 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010) (resolve doubts in favor of arbitration; harmonious construction)
- ManorCare Health Servs., Inc. v. Stiehl, 22 So.3d 96 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009) (gateway issues for compelling arbitration)
- Hitt v. Homes & Land Brokers, Inc., 993 So.2d 1162 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008) (counsel’s knowledge not evidence; relies on papers)