Young v. Horizon West, Inc.
220 Cal. App. 4th 1122
| Cal. Ct. App. | 2013Background
- Plaintiff Marilyn Young suffered a stroke in 2010 and was placed in Monterey Pines Skilled Nursing Facility for 10 days.
- Plaintiff's daughter Bobbi signed an arbitration agreement upon plaintiff's admission to Monterey Pines.
- Plaintiff later alleged sexual assault and filed suit against Monterey Pines, Horizon West entities, and Plum defendants.
- Plaintiff's advance health care directive designated a primary agent and an alternate; the POA limited authority to health care decisions, not to arbitration or nonjudicial waivers.
- Horizon West moved to compel arbitration based on Bobbi's signature; plaintiff opposed on grounds of lack of authority and unconscionability.
- Trial court denied arbitration and favored trial preference; on appeal the defendants challenge the authority issue.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Did Bobbi Young have authority to bind plaintiff to arbitration? | Bobbi lacked actual/ostensible authority under the POA and no direct evidence of acquiescence. | Bobbi acted as plaintiff's agent or ostensible agent; authority existed via POA or representations at admission. | Bobbi lacked actual or ostensible authority to bind plaintiff to arbitration. |
Key Cases Cited
- Flores v. Evergreen at San Diego, LLC, 148 Cal.App.4th 581 (Cal. Ct. App. 2007) (ostensible authority must be based on principal's conduct; mere signing by family not enough)
- Pagarigan v. Libby Care Center, Inc., 99 Cal.App.4th 298 (Cal. Ct. App. 2002) (signing arbitration agreements by daughters not binding absent agency)
- Goliger v. AMS Properties, Inc., 123 Cal.App.4th 374 (Cal. Ct. App. 2004) (signature by another as 'responsible party' not evidence of agency)
- Warfield v. Summerville Senior Living, 158 Cal.App.4th 443 (Cal. Ct. App. 2007) (no evidence of wife's consent to husband acting as agent)
- Crowley Maritime Corp. v. Boston Old Colony Ins. Co., 158 Cal.App.4th 1061 (Cal. Ct. App. 2007) (equitable estoppel not viable where no direct contract with signatory plaintiff)