Arbitration & Mediation

Is the Second DCA Giving Defendants Two Hearings on Motions to Compel Arbitration?

By Christopher B. Hopkins, Esq.

A curious, brief opinion came out of the Second District ordering a trial court to hold a "full" evidentiary hearing on a motion to compel arbitration -- yet the request for the evidentiary hearing was made by the defendant at the hearing on their motion.

The case is FL_Carrollwood Care Center, LLC; Senior Health Management - Gold Coast, LLC et al. v. Estate of Robert Dizon Gordon, Sr. (Davis, Whatley and LaRose).

In response to a nursing law residents' rights lawsuit, the defendant-facility filed a motion to compel arbitration, which was set for hearing. Some discovery was obviously undertaken as to arbitration issues since the opinion references a deposition of a facility employee who handles admissions. Two days before the hearing, the Plaintiff filed a response, arguing that the Resident lacked capacity to contract.

At the hearing on defendant's motion, defense counsel requested a "full evidentiary hearing" if the court believed the Plaintiff had raised a disputed issue. Curiously, the opinion referenced that "both parties presented argument and some documentary evidence" at the hearing. There was no indication in the opinion as to the length of the hearing; which side set the hearing; and/or why is was (or was not) an evidentiary hearing.

Citing Florida Statute 682.03(1), the Panel held that the Arbitration Code requires an evidentiary hearing if a trial court finds a substantial issues is raised as to the making of the agreement.

Applied herein, it appears the Panel was taking the position that the (first?) hearing was an "expedited" one -- as called for under the statute -- and, at the hearing, it became evident that a factual dispute existed as to the making of the agreement which mandated a (second?) "full" evidentiary hearing.

Full post as published by Florida Arbitration Law on May 24, 2010 (boomark / email).