Progressive Eldercare Services—Chicot, Inc. v. Long

• Court: Arkansas Court of Appeals
• Writing for the Court: DAVID M. GLOVER, Judge.
• Citation: Progressive Eldercare Services—Chicot, Inc. v. Long, 2014 Ark. App. 661, 449 S.W.3d 324 (Ark. App. 2014)
• Decision Date: 19 November 2014
• Docket Number: No. CV–14–401.,CV–14–401.
• Parties: PROGRESSIVE ELDERCARE SERVICES—CHICOT, INC., d/b/a Lake Village Rehabilitation and Care Center and Chicot Operations, LLC d/b/a Lake Village Rehabilitation and Care Center, Appellants v. Sue LONG, as the Administrator for the Estate of Marion L. “Sugar” Long, Deceased, Appellee.

2014 Ark. App. 661

449 S.W.3d 324

PROGRESSIVE ELDERCARE SERVICES—CHICOT, INC., d/b/a Lake Village Rehabilitation and Care Center and Chicot Operations, LLC d/b/a Lake Village Rehabilitation and Care Center, Appellants

v.Sue LONG, as the Administrator for the Estate of Marion L. “Sugar” Long, Deceased, Appellee.

No. CV–14–401.

Court of Appeals of Arkansas.

Nov. 19, 2014.

Kutak Rock LLP, by: Mark W. Dossett, Jeff Fletcher, and Max Deitchler, Fayetteville, for appellants.

David A. Couch, PLLC, by: David A. Couch, for appellee.

Opinion

DAVID M. GLOVER, Judge.

Appellee, Sue Long, as administrator for the estate of her husband, Marion L. “Sugar” Long, filed suit against appellants, Progressive Eldercare Services—Chicot, Inc. d/b/a Lake Village Rehabilitation and Care Center and Chicot Operations, LLC d/b/a Lake Village Rehabilitation and Care Center (Progressive), seeking damages for negligence and wrongful death. Progressive filed a motion to compel arbitration, which the trial court denied. In denying the motion to compel, the trial court determined that Sue Long did not have actual or apparent authority to sign the arbitration agreement. The trial court further determined that Marion Long was not a third-party beneficiary of the agreement that was executed by Sue Long. Progressive does not appeal the decision regarding lack of authority. Rather, the two issues it raises in this appeal both challenge the trial court's decision regarding third-party-beneficiary status: 1) under Arkansas contract law, the third-party-beneficiary doctrine applies to enforce an arbitration agreement against a nursing-home resident when the agreement was entered into between the responsible party and the nursing-home defendant; 2) persuasive authority from the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Arkansas and other state and federal jurisdictions further supports applying the third-party-beneficiary doctrine to compel arbitration in these circumstances. We affirm the trial court's denial of the motion to compel arbitration.

Background

In its February 6, 2014 order, the trial court explained the context in which the case arose and its rationale for denying the motion to compel. On July 7, 2010, Marion Long, Sue's husband and the decedent in this case, became a resident of the Lake Village Rehabilitation and Care Center. When he was admitted, Sue Long signed all of the required documents, including an arbitration agreement. Marion Long resided at the center until on or about September 1, 2010, when appellant Progressive Eldercare Services—Chicot, Inc., assumed control and operation of the facility. It is undisputed that Sue Long did not have a power of attorney or any court or legal document authorizing her to serve as Marion Long's agent, i.e., to sign on his behalf. It is also undisputed that Marion Long was incapacitated and confused at the time of his admission, preventing him from being able to understand the contents of the admission forms and to make care and treatment decisions, even though he had not been declared mentally incompetent. None of the admission documents were ever executed by Marion Long; rather, they were executed by Sue Long. The arbitration agreement signed by Sue provides in part:

The facility and Patient or Legal Representative agree to first utilize the Facility Grievance process to resolve all concerns, but if not satisfied, there is agreement to participate in arbitration to settle a dispute between the parties. Arbitration assists in the resolution of the concern faster and less expensive then litigating the dispute in the courts. An unrelated and unbiased individual, the arbitrator, is selected by the Patient or Legal Representative and the Facility, to hear the dispute. Specifically, the Patient or Legal Representative will select the Arbitrator from a list of five names provided by the Nursing Facility. The patient or Legal Representative may select the Arbitrator from this list or propose list of five names to serve as the Arbitrator to the Nursing Facility for its selection. The list must contain the names of certified Arbitrators with five or more years of experience and be licensed Arkansas attorneys whose offices are located within the State of Arkansas. The Nursing Facility will contact the selected Arbitrator and finalize the appointment. The Resident or Legal Representative will have the right to be represented by an attorney at the Arbitration hearing. Each party shall bear its own expenses

...