Judge: Martha K. Gooding, Case: 2022-01238974, Date: 2022-10-24 Tentative Ruling
1) Motion for Order to Stay Proceedings
2) Motion to Compel Arbitration
3) Case Management Conference
The Motion by Defendant St. Edna Subacute and Rehabilitation Center to compel arbitration and stay the case is DENIED.
Plaintiff’s objections are overruled as to Nos. I and III and sustained as to No. II.
Defendant’s objections are all overruled.
The existence of an agreement to arbitrate is a condition precedent to enforcement. Therefore, lack of agreement is ground to refuse arbitration: “[A]rbitration is a matter of contract and a party cannot be required to submit to arbitration any dispute which he has not agreed so to submit.” (United Steelworkers of America v. Warrior & Gulf Navigation Co. (1960) 363 US 574, 582; Grey v. American Mgmt. Services (2012) 204 Cal.App.4th 803, 805-809.)
It is the court's responsibility to determine whether the parties agreed to arbitrate the dispute. (See 9 USC § 4 (“If the making of the arbitration agreement … be in issue, the court shall proceed summarily to the trial thereof” (emphasis added)); Code Civ. Proc., § 1281.2 (If the court “determines that [a written] agreement to arbitrate a controversy exists … [it may order enforcement]”).)
Defendant contends that during Decedent Lidia Villavicencio-Caballero’s residency at St. Edna, Decedent, via her representative Lidia Entrala, signed an Arbitration Agreement on 12/8/20. (Silva Decl., ¶¶ 4, 5, Ex. A; Do Decl., Ex. AA (Appointment of Personal Representative).)
The
parties submit conflicting evidence as to whether Entrala ever signed the
arbitration agreement on behalf of Decedent.
Defendant submits a declaration from Blanca Silva, the Admissions Coordinator at St. Edna, who declares that she observed Ms. Entrala review and sign the Arbitration Agreement, thereby indicating that she accepted its terms on behalf of Decedent. (Silva Decl., ⁋ 9.) In opposition, Plaintiff submits a declaration stating that she does not recall ever signing or seeing the arbitration agreement. She states she was diagnosed with Covid on 11/26/20 and was in quarantine through 12/11/20. She states she never left her house on December 8th, the date she purportedly signed the agreement. (Entrala Decl., ¶ 2.) In reply, Defendant submits a declaration from Donna Durkin, St. Edna’s Business Office Manager, who attaches an audit trail that demonstrates that Plaintiff viewed and electronically signed various documents on 12/8/20. (Durkin Reply Decl., ¶ 2, Ex. A.)
Ultimately, the Court need not make a determination as to the credibility of the parties and the conflicting evidence, for the reasons stated below.
There is no dispute Decedent did not sign the arbitration agreement; rather, Plaintiff purportedly signed it as Decedent’s lawful representative and responsible party. (See, Appointment of Personal Representative, attached as Exhibit “AA” to Do Decl., and attached as Exhibit “C” to Junn Decl.)
The Appointment of Personal Representative is incomplete. It states the name of the applicant as Lidia Caballero (Decedent). But the name of the individual to be appointed as representative is blank. Also, the signature line for the authorized representative is blank.
Also, importantly, the purpose of the appointment is to appoint a person “as my authorized representative to accompany, assist, and represent me in my application for, or redetermination of, Medi-Cal benefits.” (Id.)
The authorization does not confer authority on the representative to make any other healthcare or legal decisions for the applicant.
In Young v. Horizon West, Inc. (2013) 220 Cal. App. 4th 1122,
the owners and operators of a skilled nursing facility appealed from an order denying their motion to compel arbitration with their former patient, plaintiff and respondent Marylin Young. Appellants argued the trial court erred in determining plaintiff's daughter lacked authority to sign an arbitration agreement on plaintiff's behalf. The court of appeal agreed with the trial court that the daughter’s execution of the arbitration agreement was unauthorized, and it affirmed the denial of the motion to compel arbitration. (Id. at 1124-1135.)
In Flores v. Evergreen at San Diego, LLC (2007) 148 Cal.App.4th 581, defendants sought to compel arbitration of elder abuse claims brought regarding Mrs. Flores, whose husband signed an arbitration agreement at her admission to a skilled nursing facility. Mr. Flores did not have power of attorney over his wife. The court stated that “[g]enerally, a person who is not a party to an arbitration agreement is not bound by it.” The court cited to Garrison v. Superior Court (2005) 132 Cal.App.4th 253, 265, where, in contrast, the Court held that proof of a daughter’s durable power of attorney to make health care decisions for her mother was sufficient to allow her to bind her mother to an arbitration agreement in the health care facility’s admission documents. (Id. at 587.)
As noted above, Defendant here only presents an incomplete and unsigned authorization to represent Decedent with respect to her application for Medicare benefits. There is no evidence of any intent on the part of Decedent to confer agency on Plaintiff with respect to healthcare or legal decisions.
As a result, the Court finds that Defendant has failed to show a valid agreement to arbitrate the claims asserted in this matter.
Plaintiff is ordered to give notice.