ELVEDIA ELDRIDGE, APPELLANT,
v.
INTEGRATED HEALTH SERVICES, INC.; CENTRAL PARK LODGES, INC., D/B/A INTEGRATED HEALTH SERVICES OF LAKELAND AT OAKBRIDGE; AND INTEGRATED HEALTH SERVICES DEVELOPMENT, INC., APPELLEES

Fla. 2d DCA | 2001-11-28
No. 2D01-2344
Parker, Acting Chief Judge, Northcutt, J., Casanueva, J.
805 So. 2d 982 Florida District Court of Appeal, Second District (2001) Caution
Cited by 11 cases

AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.

Synopsis

The court affirmed the trial court's order compelling arbitration of a nursing home resident's negligence and rights violation claims, holding that the admission contract was not procedurally unconscionable and therefore the arbitration clause was enforceable.

Holding

An admission contract between a nursing home and resident is not procedurally unconscionable merely because it contains an arbitration clause, and therefore the arbitration clause is enforceable.

Headnotes

[1] To invalidate an arbitration clause on unconscionability grounds, a party must establish both procedural and substantive unconscionability.

Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence
Facts & Procedural History

Elvedia Eldridge entered into an admission contract with Integrated Health Services entities and subsequently filed an action for negligence and viola…

The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.

Topics
Arbitration Clause Enforceability Substantive Unconscionability Procedural Unconscionability Enforceability

Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Arbitration Clause Enforceability cases and more on FLexlaw

Opinion of the Court
PARKER, Acting Chief Judge.

PARKER, Acting Chief Judge.

Elvedia Eldridge appeals from a nonfi-nal order granting the amended motion to stay action and motion to compel arbitration of appellees Integrated Health Services, Inc.; Central Park Lodges, Inc., d/b/a Integrated Health Services of Lake-land at Oakbridge; and Integrated Health Services Development, Inc., in Eldridge’s action for negligence and violation of nursing home residents’ rights. We affirm the trial court’s order. Eldridge contended in the trial court the admission contract she entered into with the appellees was unconscionable and that, therefore, the arbitration clause in the contract was unenforceable. She cites Powertel, Inc. v. Bexley, 743 So. 2d 570, 574 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999), review denied, 763 So. 2d 1044 (Fla.2000), for the proposition that a party must establish both procedural and substantive unconscionability in order to invalidate an arbitration clause. We affirm the trial court’s ruling that, under the facts of this case, the admission contract was not procedurally unconscionable. Like the trial court, we do not reach the issue of substantive unconscionability because Eldridge failed to establish the necessary element of procedural unconsciona-bility. See id. Because these are the only issues Eldridge raises regarding the validity of the arbitration clause, we do not address whether any other basis exists to hold the arbitration clause unenforceable.

Affirmed.

NORTHCUTT and CASANUEVA, JJ., concur.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • Bland v. Health Care & Ret. Corp. OF Am., 927 So. 2d 252 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006)
    …ty.” Id. at 64. This court, however, eschews the “sliding scale” approach. Rather, we assess procedural unconscionability and substantive unconscionability independently. Petsch, 872 So. 2d at 265 (citing Eldridge v. Integrated Health Servs., Inc., 805 So. 2d 982 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001)). Having concluded that the trial court properly determined that the Agreement was not procedurally unconscionable, we need not address the issue of substantive unconscionability. Id.; Fonte v. AT & T Wireless Servs., Inc., 903 So…
  • Orkin Exterminating Co., Inc. v. Petsch, 872 So. 2d 259 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004)
    …tel, 743 So. 2d at 573-74. Thus, we look to Florida law to determine unconseionability. For a contractual provision to be voided, it must be both procedurally and substantively unconscionable. See El- [*265] dridge v. Integrated Health Servs. Inc., 805 So. 2d 982 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001); Powertel, 743 So. 2d at 574. The circuit court in this case found the arbitration provision was a contract of adhesion and, therefore, proeedurally unconscionable. It declared the provision substantively unconscionable because it…
  • Manorcare Health Servs., Inc. v. Stiehl, 22 So. 3d 96 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009)
    …Nichols, 908 So. 2d 1178 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005); Tandem Health Care of St. Petersburg, Inc. v. Whitney, 897 So. 2d 531 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005); Germann v. Age Inst. of Fla., Inc., 912 So. 2d 590 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005); Eldridge v. Integrated Health Servs., Inc., 805 So. 2d 982 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001); Estate of Blanchard v. Cent. Park Lodges (Tarpon Springs), Inc., 805 So. 2d 6 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001); Five Points Health Care, Ltd. v. Mallory, 998 So. 2d 1180 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008); Slusser v. Life Care Ctrs. of Am., Inc., 977 So. 2d…

Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw