Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Manorcare Health Services, Inc. v. Stiehl

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided August 21, 2009No. 2D08-2351Published

1Concurrence

ALTENBERND, Judge,

Specially concurring.

I concur in this decision because it is consistent with the existing precedent from this district. I have come to the conclusion, however, that it is both bad policy and bad law to allow an arbitrator to make case-specific, non-precedential, confidential decisions about the enforceability of clauses in an arbitration agreement when those clauses limit or eliminate rights specially created by the legislature to protect nursing home residents. Accordingly, I would prefer to follow the approach of the other districts and permit trial courts to make…

2Cases cited31 opinions

  1. Gainesville Health Care Center, Inc. v. WestonDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2003
  2. Blankfeld v. Richmond Health Care, Inc.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 2005
  3. Romano Ex Rel. Romano v. Manor Care, Inc.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 2003
  4. Consolidated Res. Healthcare Fund I, Ltd. v. FenelusDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2003
  5. ALTERRA HEALTHCARE v. Estate of Linton Ex Rel. GrahamDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2007

26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API