Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Broadway Health & Rehab, LLC v. Roberts

Court of Appeals of Arkansas, Division IV

May 10, 2017

BROADWAY HEALTH & REHAB, LLC, d/b/a BROADWAY HEALTHCARE CENTER; BROADWAY HEALTH HOLDINGS, LLC; ARKANSAS SNF OPERATIONS ACQUISITION III, LLC; ARKANSAS NURSING HOME ACQUISITION, LLC; CSCV HOLDINGS II, LLC; CAPITAL FUNDING GROUP, INC.; ALAN ZUCCARI; BRIAN REYNOLDS; JOHN W. DWYER; SLC PROFESSIONALS, LLC; SLC PROFESSIONALS AR7, LLC; ADDIT, LLC; AND JACK H. SMITH, IN HIS CAPACITY AS ADMINISTRATOR OF BROADWAY HEALTHCARE CENTER APPELLANTS
v.
CATHERINE ROBERTS, AS GUARDIAN OF THE PERSON AND ESTATE OF EVELYN KING, AN INCAPACITATED PERSON APPELLEE

         APPEAL FROM THE CRITTENDEN COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT [NO. 18CV-15-646] HONORABLE TOMMY FOWLER, JUDGE

          Kutak Rock LLP, by: Mark W. Dossett, Scott Jackson, and Samantha B. Leflar, for appellants.

          Ford & Cook, PLC, by: Bryce D. Cook; and James, Carter & Priebe, LLP, by: Jeff Priebe, for appellee.

          RITA W. GRUBER, Chief Judge

         Catherine Roberts sued Broadway Health & Rehab, LLC, and related entities (collectively "Broadway") for medical malpractice, negligence, and violations of the Arkansas Long-Term Care Residents' Rights Act[1] for injuries her mother, Evelyn King, sustained while a resident at Broadway Health & Rehab in West Memphis. Broadway appeals from an order denying its motion to compel arbitration.[2] Broadway argues on appeal that the circuit court erred in finding that the Federal Arbitration Act did not apply, in denying Broadway the opportunity to conduct discovery regarding Ms. Roberts's authority to sign the agreement for her mother, and in finding that the third-party-beneficiary doctrine was inapplicable. Broadway also argues that nonsignatories to the arbitration agreement may enforce the agreement. We hold that there was no valid arbitration agreement and that the circuit court did not abuse its discretion in denying Broadway the opportunity to conduct further discovery. Accordingly, we affirm the circuit court's order denying the motion to compel arbitration. This disposition renders all other issues moot.

         When Ms. King was admitted to the facility on March 5, 2013, Ms. Roberts signed the relevant paperwork, which included an arbitration agreement. The arbitration agreement lists Evelyn N. King in the space immediately next to "Print Resident Name." Directly beneath that line is a signature space in which Ms. Roberts signed her name next to the date. The following appears directly under her signature:

Signature of (1) Resident or (2) Resident Representative (circle one)
If Resident Representative, please check the basis of your authority:
[ ] Power of Attorney (attach document)
[ ] Court-Appointed Guardian (attach document)
[ ] Other. Please explain. __

         Neither "Resident" nor "Resident Representative" was circled. The box next to "Other" was checked, with the explanation "Daughter" written on the blank line next to it.

         On November 24, 2015, Ms. Roberts, as guardian of the person and estate of Evelyn King, filed a complaint against Broadway alleging negligence, medical malpractice, and violations of the Arkansas Long-Term Care Residents' Rights Act. Specifically, Ms. Roberts alleged that Ms. King was admitted to the facility for incapacity due to a previous stroke and that during her time there she sustained numerous injuries, including a severe injury to her left hand; and she suffered from illnesses, including infection, poor hygiene, poor nutrition, and unnecessary pain and suffering. Broadway answered and then filed a motion to dismiss the complaint and compel arbitration pursuant to the Federal Arbitration Act, arguing that Ms. Roberts, on behalf of her mother, executed a binding arbitration agreement that encompassed the claims in her complaint. In the alternative, Broadway argued that, if the court found Ms. Roberts lacked authority to bind her mother, the arbitration agreement was valid under the third-party-beneficiary doctrine. Ms. Roberts resisted arbitration, claiming that Broadway did not own the facility when the arbitration agreement was signed and thus was not a party to the agreement and could not enforce it; Ms. Roberts lacked the authority to bind Ms. King; and the third-party-beneficiary doctrine was inapplicable because there was no valid underlying agreement between Ms. Roberts and Broadway.

         Following a hearing, the circuit court denied Broadway's motion to compel arbitration, finding that the arbitration agreement was invalid as a matter of law, that Ms. King did not execute the agreement, that Ms. Roberts lacked the legal capacity to bind Ms. King to the terms of the arbitration agreement, that the third-party-beneficiary doctrine was inapplicable, and that the Federal Arbitration Act did not apply to Ms. Roberts's claims. ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.