Personal Injury Lawyer Blog
(Please note: the names and locations of all parties have been changed to protect the confidentiality of the participants in this medical malpractice/personal injury case and its proceedings.)
The Physician-Patient Arbitration Agreement prepared by Defendant Black was signed by Ms. Hall in Italian, her primary language, on February 27, 2006, almost two-and-a-half years before the medical treatment in question.
Defendant Black attempted to comply with California Code of Civil Procedure 1295 (a), (b) and (c) to make the agreement enforceable as a Section 1295 medical malpractice arbitration agreement. However this effort was undercut by Defendant Black’s insertion of Article 2 into the arbitration agreement.
Article 2 of the arbitration agreement begins in bold type stating: All Claims Must Be Arbitrated. The clause goes on to state that “… this agreement shall cover all claims or controversies whether in tort, contract, or otherwise….” For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.
The second clause of Article 2 states that:
Filing by Physician of any action in Court to collect any fee from patient shall not waive the right to compel arbitration of any malpractice claim. However, following the assertion of any claim against Physician, any fee dispute, whether or not the subject of any existing Court action, shall be resolved by arbitration.
As set forth below, Plaintiffs contend that the insertion of Article 2 undermines and invalidates the application of C.C.P. 1295 to the arbitration agreement.
Defendant Black, by and through his attorney, requested that Plaintiffs stipulate to binding arbitration. Plaintiffs, by and through their attorney, advised Defendant Black that they would not stipulate to arbitration. Defendant Black filed the present motion with this court to compel plaintiffs to arbitrate their claim. (See Part 3 of 10.)
For more information you are welcome to contact Sacramento personal injury lawyer, Moseley Collins.