Relevant Nursing Home Case Law

Validity of Nursing Home Arbitration Agreements Depends Heavily on Surrounding Facts

April 7, 2017 | Lebowitz & Mzhen

Earlier this month, the Supreme Court of Georgia issued a written opinion in a nursing home negligence case that required the court to determine if an arbitration agreement in a pre-admission contract was binding against the deceased resident’s estate in a subsequent wrongful death lawsuit. The court determined that due to the derivative nature of wrongful death lawsuits, the deceased resident’s estate was bound by the agreement.

The Facts of the Case

The plaintiff in this case was the husband of a woman who had died while in the care of the defendant nursing home. Prior to the plaintiff’s wife’s admission to the nursing home, the plaintiff’s wife had executed a durable power of attorney in her husband’s favor. This allowed him to make legal decisions regarding his wife’s medical and financial decisions.

Before the plaintiff’s wife was admitted into the defendant nursing home, the plaintiff signed a pre-admission contract that contained an agreement to arbitrate any claims that may arise from the nursing home’s care of his wife. The plaintiff signed the agreement.

Nursing Home Arbitration Clauses Are Not Necessarily Binding, Depending on the Circumstances

March 31, 2017 | Lebowitz & Mzhen

It is common for anyone seeking admission into a nursing home to be presented with an arbitration agreement prior to being admitted. These arbitration clauses are often hidden in large paragraphs of small print and are easy to overlook. However, once signed, arbitration clauses often waive important rights and can have a major effect on a party’s ability to file a lawsuit against the nursing home, should anything go wrong in the future.

While a valid arbitration agreement may prevent a victim of nursing home abuse or neglect from using the court system to pursue a case against the at-fault nursing home, not all arbitration agreements are valid. In fact, a series of recent court decisions across the country has indicated courts’ willingness to declare arbitration agreements invalid when they are not signed by the appropriate party, too hidden, or entered into by an incompetent party.

A recent case out of Florida illustrates how courts may choose to invalidate an arbitration agreement when the person signing the contract is not the resident themselves.

Court Holds Family Member of Nursing Home Resident Cannot Consent to Arbitration Unless Resident Is Deemed Incompetent by Primary Care Physician

July 19, 2016 | Lebowitz & Mzhen

Earlier this month, the Supreme Court of Mississippi issued an interesting opinion for anyone who signed an arbitration clause when admitting their loved one to a nursing home. In the case, Tarvin v. CLC of Jackson, the court determined that the arbitration clause signed by the plaintiff on behalf of her elderly father was not binding because she did not have the legal right to waive her father’s rights, absent a determination of his incompetency.

Arbitration Clauses in Nursing Home Contracts

Whenever a party enters into a contract, they try to include as many favorable terms as possible. However, sometimes nursing homes can overreach, including arbitration clauses that may act to prevent the resident from using the court system to adjudicate any disputes between the parties. Indeed, if an arbitration clause is valid, the parties are required to go to arbitration instead of filing a lawsuit. This can have negative effects on plaintiffs, since usually the nursing home selects which arbitrator to use, giving rise to potential favoritism.

Arbitration clauses, however, are not always valid. In fact, in Tarvin, the court held that the arbitration clause at issue could not be enforced. The court explained that a nursing home resident’s right to use the court system is an important one, and it cannot be waived by just anyone. The court explained that it is only when a resident is deemed incompetent that a loved one can validly sign a binding arbitration agreement. In the Tarvin case, the doctor who determined the plaintiff’s father was incompetent was not his primary care provider. Thus, the court held that there was insufficient evidence proving the elderly man’s incompetence, and he did not validly consent to arbitration through his daughter.

Plaintiff’s Failure to Produce Expert’s Report in a Timely Manner Results in Early Dismissal

July 12, 2016 | Lebowitz & Mzhen

Earlier this month, a state appellate court issued a written opinion in a wrongful death case brought by the loved one of a nursing home resident whom the plaintiff claims was neglected prior to her death. In the case, Handy v. Madison County Nursing Home, the plaintiff’s claims were ultimately dismissed by the court during a summary judgment proceeding because the plaintiff failed to meet her initial burden to show that a prima facie case existed against the nursing home.

The Facts of the Case

The plaintiff filed a wrongful death lawsuit against the nursing home that had cared for her mother in the three years leading up to her death. In her complaint, the plaintiff alleged that nursing home staff members were negligent in failing to detect a bowel obstruction that ultimately contributed to her mother’s early death. As a part of her case, the plaintiff attached a certification explaining that, if called to testify, her expert witness would explain that the defendant nursing home violated a standard of care it owed to her mother.

In a pre-trial summary judgment proceeding, the nursing home asked the court to dismiss the case based on the fact that the plaintiff failed to produce evidence of the home’s negligence. Specifically, the nursing home argued that the certification was not sufficient to prove negligence and that an expert’s affidavit was necessary. The plaintiff sought several continuances and failed to provide an expert’s affidavit at each scheduled listing. Eventually, the nursing home asked the court to dismiss the case based on a lack of evidence.

Court Improperly Failed to Allow Nursing Home Plaintiff to Name Additional Defendants Later Discovered to Be Involved in Key Decision-Making Roles

June 28, 2016 | Lebowitz & Mzhen

Earlier this month, an Oklahoma court issued an opinion in a case brought by the surviving family members of a woman who died in a nursing home while in the defendants’ control. The case, Maree v. Neuwirth, involved the plaintiffs’ decision to add additional defendants to the lawsuit after they discovered that these parties may have had a key role in the decision-making leading up to their loved one’s death. The court hearing the case held that it was improper for the lower court to deny the plaintiffs the ability to add these defendants.

The Facts of the Case

Back in January 2011, the elderly loved one of the plaintiffs fell while a resident at the defendant nursing home. Two days later, she died in the hospital. It was alleged that the elderly woman’s injuries were worsened because nursing home staff failed to respond to a “call light” in a timely manner.

The woman’s loved ones filed a lawsuit against the nursing home about two years after the alleged act of negligence. Initially, the lawsuit was filed against most of the nursing home’s management, as well as against the nursing home itself.

Court Finds Nursing Home Facility Waived Its Right to Seek Mediation in Wrongful Death Case

June 7, 2016 | Lebowitz & Mzhen

Earlier this month, the South Carolina Supreme Court issued a written opinion illustrating how a party’s failure to be upfront with its intention to compel mediation may prevent that party from later compelling mediation. In the case, Johnson v. Heritage Healthcare of Estill, the court determined that the defendant nursing facility waived its right to seek arbitration after the nursing facility failed to demand arbitration when the plaintiff initially filed the lawsuit.

The Facts of the Case

The plaintiff’s mother passed away while in the care of the defendant nursing home. After her mother’s death, the plaintiff filed a wrongful death case against the nursing home, alleging that the negligent care it provided to her mother led to her death. Prior to admitting her mother to the home, the plaintiff had been granted a Power of Attorney and had signed an arbitration agreement, consenting to submit any claims to an arbitration panel rather than pursuing them through the court system.

Once the defendant nursing home got notice of the claim, it answered the complaint, asserting several defenses. One of the defenses cited was that the plaintiff had agreed to seek arbitration, rather than use the court system, in the contract signed prior to her mother’s admission. The nursing home also sought a discovery order from the court, ordering the plaintiff to disclose certain documents. Importantly, while the nursing home cited arbitration as a defense, it never actually demanded arbitration or initiated arbitration proceedings. It was not until eight months later that the nursing home filed a motion to compel arbitration.

State Court Holds that Incompetence May Act to Toll a Statute of Limitations

May 27, 2016 | Lebowitz & Mzhen

Earlier this month, the West Virginia Supreme Court issued an opinion in a case requiring the court to decide whether a person’s mental incompetence can toll a statute of limitations. In other words, the question was whether a person’s inability to understand that they may have a viable case can actually excuse that person from filing a timely lawsuit. The court ultimately held that in some situations, including the one in front of it, a person’s incompetence may toll the statute of limitations.

The Facts of the Case

The plaintiff was the estate of a man who passed away while in the defendant nursing home’s care. According to the court’s opinion, the man resided at the defendant nursing home for 10 years. However, during the last several years, according to the man’s estate, the facility treated him poorly, ultimately leading to his early death.

The man’s estate filed the lawsuit approximately two years after the man died. At pre-trial hearings, the defendant attempted to limit the evidence that the plaintiff was permitted to submit to the court, arguing that some of the evidence was from before the allowable time period, according to the statute. The statute was a two-year statute.

Court Holds Failure to Comply with Mandatory Nursing Home Abuse Reporting Requirements May Give Rise to Liability

May 20, 2016 | Lebowitz & Mzhen

Earlier this month, the Supreme Court of Washington issued a groundbreaking opinion extending potential liability in a nursing home abuse lawsuit to nurses who were required to report discovered instances of nursing home abuse but failed to do so. In the case, Kim v. Lakeside Adult Family Home, the court determined that the Abuse of Vulnerable Adults Act (AVAA), a state-enacted law to protect the elderly, creates a separate cause of action against those who are required to report discovered instances of nursing home abuse but fail to do so.

The Facts of the Case

The plaintiffs in this case are the surviving loved ones of an elderly woman who was given a lethal dose of the pain-killer drug morphine. The drug was not prescribed by a physician but was administered by a nurse who was not a party to this lawsuit.

The defendants were two nurses who were not employed by the facility charged with caring for the deceased, and they were in no way responsible for her care. Both defendants were caring for another individual at the facility when they witnessed what appeared to be lapses in care. On March 28 or 29, one of the defendants witnessed the deceased lying on the floor. The defendant confronted the other nurse, who told the defendant that the patient “falls a lot” and that it was nothing out of the ordinary.

Improperly Notarized Power of Attorney Results in Dismissal of Case against Allegedly Negligent Nursing Home

April 14, 2016 | Lebowitz & Mzhen

Earlier this month, the Arkansas Supreme Court issued an opinion dismissing what may have been a meritorious wrongful death case based on the fact that the document giving the plaintiff power of attorney was not validly executed. In the case, Quarles v. Courtyard Gardens Health & Rehab, the lower court dismissed the plaintiff’s case based on two reasons, one of which was the fact that the power of attorney document was notarized after the decedent had signed it, rather than simultaneously, as the law requires.

The Facts of the Case

Bernie Jean Quarles, the decedent, spent 11 months at the defendant nursing home before she was moved to another facility. In June 2010, Quarles allegedly executed a power of attorney document in favor of her son, the plaintiff. A short time later, while his mother was still alive, the plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the defendant nursing home on behalf of his mother, whom he claimed was “incapacitated.” The lawsuit alleged that the nursing home’s negligence resulted in the woman’s deteriorating health.

When the man’s mother died a few months later, he sought to substitute himself as the primary plaintiff. The parties were ordered to engage in arbitration to see if they could reach a mutually acceptable result. As a part of the mediation, the parties exchanged discovery. However, before arbitration began, the defendants asked the court to dismiss the case based on the fact that the power of attorney was never validly executed.

Doctrine of Equitable Tolling May Save Some Nursing Home Negligence Lawsuits from Dismissal

December 29, 2015 | Lebowitz & Mzhen

Earlier this month, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals issued an opinion in a case that involved allegations of nursing home negligence that were filed after the applicable statute of limitations outlined in the Federal Tort Claims Act. In the case, Hawver v. United States, the plaintiff may be given the opportunity to show the court that equitable factors justified the late filing of the case.

The Facts of the Case

Briefly, the relevant facts of Hawver v. United States are as follows. Hawver claimed that a federally run nursing facility was responsible for the death of her mother, based on the negligent care they provided while she was in the facility’s care. Hawver filed her case in federal district court, invoking the court’s subject matter jurisdiction. This is important because federal courts cannot hear every case between two parties. There must be a question of federal law, the case must involve a federal agency or employee, or the case must arise between parties from two different states and have a certain minimum amount in controversy. Here, the plaintiff was filing suit in federal court based on the fact that the nursing facility was federally qualified.