The following blog entry is written from a defendant’s position as trial approaches. Reviewing this kind of briefing should help potential plaintiffs and clients better understand how parties in personal injury cases present such issues to the court.
(Please note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this medical malpractice case and its proceedings.)
It is worth noting that situations similar to those described in this case could just as easily occur at any of the healthcare facilities in the area, such as Kaiser Permanente, Regional Medical Center, Good Samaritan Hospital, Santa Clara Valley Medical Center, or O’Connor Hospital. For more information you are welcome to contact San Jose personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.
ARGUMENT
PLAINTIFFS SHOULD BE COMPELLED TO ARBITRATE ALL OF THEIR CLAIMS AGAINST DR. LEE BECAUSE THE FEBRUARY 27, 2005, PHYSICIAN-PATIENT ARBITRATION AGREEMENT IS VALID.
The State of California has a strong public policy favoring arbitration over litigation as a speedy and relatively inexpensive means of dispute resolution which eases court congestion. (Pietrelli v. Peacock, (1993) Cal.App.4th 943, 946.) A court should use every effort to enforce arbitration agreements because arbitration is a highly favored forum for settling disputes. (Pacific Inv. Co. v. Townsend, (1976) 58 Cal.App.3d 1, 9.) A written arbitration agreement is valid and enforceable and irrevocable as consistent with standard principles. Madden v. Kaiser Foundation Hospitals (1976) 17 Cal.3d 699. Once a document is signed, a proper arbitration agreement governs all subsequent open book account transactions for medical services unless rescinded by written notice within thirty days of signature. (Code of Civ. Proc. § 295(c).)
Code of Civil Procedure section 295 requires certain language to be present in an arbitration agreement concerning medical services. The arbitration agreement must contain the following language:
It is understood that any dispute as to medical malpractice, that is as to whether any medical services rendered under this contract were unnecessary or unauthorized or were improperly, negligently, or incompetently rendered, will be determined by submission to arbitration as provided by. California law, and not by a lawsuit or resort to court process except as California law provides for judicial review of arbitration proceedings. Both parties to this contract, by entering into it, are giving up their constitutional right to have any such dispute decided in a court of law before a jury, and instead are accepting the use of arbitration. (Code of Civil Proc. §1295(a).) (See Part 3 of 4.)
For more information you are welcome to contact San Jose personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.