Judge: Melvin D. Sandvig, Case: 22STCP04080, Date: 2023-04-25 Tentative Ruling

Counsel wishing to submit on a tentative ruling may inform the clerk or courtroom assisant in North Valley Department F47, 9425 Penfield Ave., Chatsworth, CA 91311, at (818) 407-2247.  Please be aware that unless all parties submit, the matter will still be called for hearing and may be argued by any appearing/non-submitting parties. If the matter is submitted on the court's tentative ruling by all parties, counsel for moving party shall give notice of ruling. This may be done by incorporating verbatim the court's tentative ruling. The tentative ruling may be extracted verbatim by copying and specially pasting, as unformatted text, from the Los Angeles Superior Court’s website, http://www.lasuperiorcourt.org. All hearings on law and motion and other calendar matters are generally NOT transcribed by a court reporter unless one is provided by the party(ies).

Case Number: 22STCP04080    Hearing Date: April 25, 2023    Dept: F47

Dept. F47

Date: 4/25/23

Case #22STCP04080

PETITION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION

Petition filed on 1/6/23.

MOVING PARTY: Defendant Parkwest Rehabilitation Center, LLC dba Parkwest Healthcare Center

RESPONDING PARTY: Plaintiff Theodore Sandoval

NOTICE: ok

RELIEF REQUESTED: An order compelling Plaintiff Theodore Sandoval to arbitrate the controversy alleged in the Complaint in binding arbitration and to stay this action. 

RULING: The petition is denied.

As against Defendant Parkwest Rehabilitation Center, LLC dba Parkwest Healthcare Center (Parkwest), Plaintiff Theodore Sandoval (Plaintiff) contends that Parkwest provided subpar care and services to Plaintiff when Plaintiff resided at Parkwest’s skilled nursing facility.  On 11/14/22, Plaintiff filed this action against Parkwest and others alleging causes of action for:

(1) Dependent Adult Abuse/Neglect Elder Abuse and (2)Violation of Resident’s Rights.

On 1/6/23, Parkwest filed and served the instant petition seeking an order compelling Plaintiff to arbitrate the controversy alleged in the Complaint in binding arbitration and to stay this action.  Plaintiff has opposed the petition and Parkwest has filed a reply to the opposition.    

In order to compel a party to arbitrate a dispute, a valid arbitration agreement must exist between the parties.  CCP 1281.2; Banner Entertainment, Inc. (1998) 62 CA4th 348, 356.  The party seeking to enforce the arbitration agreement bears the burden of establishing the existence of same.  Id.; Pagarigan (2002) 99 CA4th 298, 301.  When an enforceable arbitration agreement does not exist, the Court cannot compel a party to arbitrate the dispute.  Rodriguez (2009) 176 CA4th 1461, 1465, 1472.

Here, the evidence establishes that the arbitration agreement at issue was signed by Plaintiff’s sister, Maria Sandoval-Almada, not Plaintiff.  (See Motion, p.3:28-p.4:20; Isfeld Decl., Ex.A).  Parkwest argues that the arbitration agreement should be enforced against Plaintiff because his sister certified in the agreement that she was authorized to act and to execute the agreement on behalf of Plaintiff.  (See Isfeld Decl., Ex.A).  The attestation signed by Plaintiff’s sister also states that she had the authority to make “medical decisions” for Plaintiff.  (Id., Ex.B). 

However, Plaintiff has submitted a declaration in support of the opposition wherein he states that his sister has never been appointed his legal representative, power of attorney and/or conservator.  (Gordon Decl., Ex.1 - T. Sandoval Decl. ¶5).  Plaintiff further states that he never authorized his sister to sign any document on his behalf and waive his right to a jury trial and he and his sister never had a discussion regarding an arbitration agreement or a waive of his legal rights.  Id.

It has been held that allowing an agent to sign an admission contract if the resident is unable to understand and sign the contract because of the resident’s medical condition, does not confer authority on the agent to sign an arbitration agreement.  See Young (2013) 220 CA4th 1122,  1132-1134 (A power of attorney for health care (POA) did not provide the daughter of a nursing home resident with the authority to sign an arbitration agreement on the resident’s behalf because the power of attorney did not contain any terms authorizing the resident’s agent to make any decisions other than “health care decisions” for the resident.); Goldman (2013) 220 CA4th 1160, 1171; Goliger (2004) 123 CA4th 374-376, 378; Pagarigan, supra at 301-302 (The adult child of the resident could not bind the parent to the arbitration clause because they did not hold a Durable Power of Attorney for their mother and a next of kin’s authority to make medical decisions for the resident does not “translate into authority to sign an arbitration agreement on the patient’s behalf at the request of the nursing home.”); Flores (2007) 148 CA4th 581, 588.  Although all of the foregoing cases were cited in the opposition, Parkwest does not address any of them in the reply (nor were they mentioned in the petition).  

The evidence is insufficient to establish an actual or ostensible agency relationship between Plaintiff and his sister for purposes of enforcing the arbitration agreement.  As noted above, Plaintiff has submitted a declaration stating that he never gave his sister authority to enter the arbitration agreement on his behalf.  An ostensible agency relationship exists when the principal, in this case Plaintiff, intentionally, or by want of ordinary care, causes a third person, in this case Parkwest, to believe another to be his/her/their agent who is not really employed by him/her/them.  Mejia (2002) 99 CA4th 1448, 1456; Flores, supra at 587-588; Civil Code 2300.  Parkwest has failed to submit evidence to show that Plaintiff acted in a way to ostensibly appoint his sister as his agent for purposes of entering the arbitration agreement. 

Based on the foregoing, Parkwest has not met its burden of establishing that a valid arbitration exists between Plaintiff and Parkwest.  Therefore, the petition is denied.