HICKORY HEIGHTS HEALTH AND REHAB, LLC; CENTRAL ARKANSAS NURSING CENTERS, INC.; NURSING CONSULTANTS, INC.; AND MICHAEL MORTON APPELLANTS
v.
LEMARION ADAMS AS GUARDIAN OF IDA ADAMS APPELLEE
APPEAL
FROM THE PULASKI COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT, SIXTH DIVISION [NO.
60CV-17-6357] HONORABLE TIMOTHY DAVIS FOX, JUDGE
Hardin, Jesson & Terry, PLC, by: Jeffrey W. Hatfield,
Kynda Almefty, Carol Ricketts, and Kirkman T. Dougherty, for
appellants.
Reddick Moss, PLLC, by: Robert W. Francis, for appellee.
RAYMOND R. ABRAMSON, Judge
Hickory
Heights Health and Rehab, LLC; Central Arkansas Nursing
Centers, Inc.; Nursing Consultants, Inc.; and Michael Morton
jointly appeal the Pulaski County Circuit Court order denying
their motion to compel arbitration. On appeal, they argue
that the circuit court erred in denying their
motion.[1] We affirm.
Hickory
Heights is a nursing-home facility where Ida Adams is
currently a resident. On November 6, 2017, Ida's son and
guardian, Lemarion Adams, filed suit on her behalf against
Hickory Heights, alleging claims for negligence, medical
malpractice, breach of contract, and a violation of the
Arkansas Deceptive Trade Practices Act.
In
response, on December 29, 2017, Hickory Heights filed a
motion to compel arbitration and stay the proceedings. It
attached an arbitration agreement signed by Lemarion at
Ida's admission to Hickory Heights. The arbitration
agreement provides in part as follows:
Signing this Arbitration Agreement, as an addendum to and
part of the Admission Agreement is a condition of
admission. Once signed, this Arbitration Agreement
governs the resolution of claims.
It is understood and agreed by Facility and Resident and/or
responsible party that any and all claims, disputes, and
controversies arising out of, or in connection with, or
relating in any way to the Admission Agreement or any
service or health care provided by the Facility to the
Resident that would constitute a cause of action in a court
of law that the Facility may have now or in the future
against you or any of your representatives, or that you or
any of your representatives may have now or in the future
against the Facility, as defined above, and involving an
amount of or greater than thirty-thousand dollars and no
cents ($30, 000) shall be resolved exclusively by binding
arbitration and not by a lawsuit or resort to court
process.
By signing this agreement, the Parties acknowledge their
understanding and agreement that all disputes will be
resolved by binding arbitration:
THE PARTIES FURTHER ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THEY ARE GIVING UP AND
WAIVING THEIR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO HAVE THEIR DISPUTES
DECIDED IN A COURT OF LAW BEFORE A JUDGE AND A JURY, AND
ARE INSTEAD ACCEPTING THE USE OF ARBITRATION.
On
January 19, 2018, Lemarion filed a response and argued that
the arbitration agreement was invalid for two reasons: (1)
the agreement lacked mutuality of obligation among the
parties because it allowed Hickory Heights to sue in court
for the types of claims it would likely have against
residents, but it required injured residents to arbitrate
their likely claims; and (2) the agreement was unconscionable
and therefore unenforceable as a matter of law.
On
January 26, 2018, the circuit court entered an order without
written opinion denying Hickory Heights' motion to
compel. Hickory Heights timely appealed the order to this
court. On appeal, Hickory Heights argues that the circuit
court erred in denying its motion to compel arbitration
because the agreement mutually obligated the parties and was
not unconscionable.
When a
circuit court denies a motion to compel arbitration without
expressly stating the basis for its ruling, that ruling
encompasses the issues presented to the circuit court by the
briefs and arguments of the parties. Asset Acceptance,
LLC v. Newby, 2014 Ark. 280, 437 S.W.3d 119. On appeal,
we review a circuit court's order denying a motion to
...