Country Oaks Partners, LLC, dba Country Oaks Care Center, et al. v. Mark Harrod

The Federal A rbitration Act (FA A) requires State Legislatures and the courts to place arbitration agreements “on equal footing with all other contracts.” Kindred Nursing Centers Ltd. v. Clark, 581 U.S. 246, 248

1. (Kindred); see 9 U.S.C. § 2. Kindred held that an agent acting under a power of attorney was empowered to agree to arbitrate disputes with a nursing home arising out of the care provided to the principal. Kentucky’s “clear-statement rule,” which required the nursing home patient to explicitly grant the agent authority to so agree, violated the FAA by singling out arbitration for disfavored treatment. Id. at 248, 251-52. In its decision below, the California Supreme Court likewise declined to enforce an arbitration agreement signed by an agent appointed by his uncle under an advance directive to make “health care decisions,” which included the incapacitated patient’s admission to a nursing care facility. California’s highest court reasoned that because the Legislature expressly prohibited any agreements to arbitrate from being included within the nursing home’s standard admission contract, a “standalone” arbitration agreement regarding the medical provider’s services signed by the power of attorney at the same time was invalid absent a clear statement of his or her authority. This interpretation gives rise to the following issues:

2. Whether the FAA preempts state law contract statutes and regulations by singling out for disfavored treatment arbitration agreements entered into between California health care