UNITED HEALTH SERVICES OF GEORGIA, INC. Et Al. v. ALEXANDER Et Al.
342 Ga. App. 1
| Ga. Ct. App. | 2017Background
- Doris Alexander was admitted to a nursing home on June 12, 2013; her daughter Carol signed an optional arbitration agreement presented at admission but Doris did not sign and was not present when Carol signed.
- The arbitration form stated it was voluntary, waived jury trial, was governed by the FAA, and could be revoked within 30 days.
- Carol had previously signed some medical forms for Doris but had no power of attorney and never discussed or showed the arbitration agreement to her mother.
- Doris remained a resident until her death in February 2014; the estate (administrator Jeanette Alexander) sued the nursing home and others in May 2015 for negligence, wrongful death, and malpractice.
- Defendants moved to compel arbitration; the trial court denied the motion, finding Carol lacked authority to bind her mother. Defendants appealed; this Court affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a valid, enforceable arbitration agreement existed | Estate: Doris never agreed to arbitrate; no signature, no authorization | Nursing home/defendants: Carol had express or implied agency authority to sign for Doris | Court: No valid agreement — defendants failed to prove agency or assent |
| Whether daughter had express authority to sign arbitration | Estate: No power of attorney or express authorization | Defendants: Prior signing of medical forms showed implied express authority | Court: No — prior conduct did not show Doris expressly granted unlimited authority |
| Whether daughter had apparent/implied authority that would bind Doris | Estate: No words or conduct by Doris created apparent authority | Defendants: Nursing home relied on daughter’s past signing of documents when accepting her signature | Court: No — agency cannot be inferred from agent’s unilateral acts; no manifestations by Doris to third party |
| Whether federal policy favoring arbitration requires enforcement | Estate: Federal policy does not supersede lack of mutual assent | Defendants: Federal policy favors arbitration and supports enforcement | Court: Federal policy applies only if a valid agreement exists; no agreement here, so policy does not control |
Key Cases Cited
- Brooks Peanut Co. v. Great Southern Peanut, 322 Ga. App. 801 (court must determine existence of agreement before compelling arbitration)
- McKean v. GGNSC Atlanta, 329 Ga. App. 507 (party seeking arbitration bears burden to prove valid agreement)
- Triad Health Mgmt. of Ga., III v. Johnson, 298 Ga. App. 204 (traditional agency principles can bind nonsignatory to arbitration)
- Life Care Centers of America v. Smith, 298 Ga. App. 739 (daughter’s signature unenforceable where no general power of attorney)
- Ashburn Health Care Center v. Poole, 286 Ga. App. 24 (nursing home must establish actual authority where no power of attorney)
- Green Tree Servicing v. Jones, 333 Ga. App. 184 (federal policy enforces private arbitration agreements but court first must find agreement)
- Primerica Financial Svcs. v. Wise, 217 Ga. App. 36 (first task is to determine whether parties agreed to arbitrate)
- Hogsett v. Parkwood Nursing & Rehab. Center, 997 F. Supp. 2d 1318 (daughter lacked authority to sign arbitration where no power of attorney)