## Facts

- Riva Blankfield was admitted to Sunrise Health and Rehabilitation Center, a nursing facility operated by Richmond Health Care, Inc.
- At admission, Blankfield’s son, Melvin Blankfield, signed the facility’s admittance agreement.
- The admittance agreement contained a mandatory provision requiring that disputes be resolved by binding arbitration.
- The agreement required arbitration to be conducted under the rules of the National Health Lawyers Association (NHLA).
- NHLA rules required “clear and convincing evidence” of “misconduct,” a standard that, as applied, would substantially restrict or eliminate ordinary negligence claims.
- Blankfield later sued the facility alleging negligent care and seeking relief under Florida’s Nursing Home Residents Act, which provides private remedies for negligent nursing-home care.
- The facility moved to compel arbitration based on the admittance agreement, and the trial court granted the motion.
- After Blankfield’s death, Melvin appealed the order compelling arbitration.

## Issues

1. Whether an admission-agreement arbitration clause is unenforceable when it incorporates NHLA rules requiring clear and convincing evidence of “misconduct,” thereby impairing negligence remedies made available by Florida’s Nursing Home Residents Act.
2. Whether, and to what extent, a resident can be bound to a pre-dispute arbitration agreement signed by a family member in connection with nursing-home admission paperwork.

## Decision

- The Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed the trial court’s order compelling arbitration and remanded for further proceedings.
- The court concluded that the NHLA-rule requirement of clear and convincing proof of “misconduct” conflicted with the Nursing Home Residents Act’s remedial scheme for negligent care.
- Because the NHLA rules operated to bar or severely limit negligence claims, the arbitration provision (as drafted and applied through those rules) could not be enforced to defeat the statutory remedies the Act provides.

## Legal Principles

- An arbitration provision in a nursing-home admission contract is unenforceable when the incorporated arbitration rules materially restrict or eliminate negligence-based remedies the Legislature provided in the Nursing Home Residents Act.
- Contractual dispute-resolution terms that alter the burden of proof in a way that effectively extinguishes statutory negligence claims are void to the extent they conflict with the Act’s remedial purpose.
- Courts assess arbitration provisions in this setting by asking whether the chosen arbitral procedures preserve the resident’s substantive statutory rights and remedies, not merely whether the agreement calls for arbitration in the abstract.
- Separate from substantive validity, enforcement may also depend on whether the person who signed the admission paperwork had authority to bind the resident to a pre-dispute waiver of court access and jury trial.

## Conclusion

Blankfield held that a nursing-home admission agreement could not be enforced to compel arbitration where the incorporated NHLA rules required clear and convincing evidence of “misconduct” and, in practical effect, wiped out negligence remedies provided by Florida’s Nursing Home Residents Act; the order compelling arbitration was reversed and the case was returned to the trial court.


Blankfield v. Richmond Health Care, Inc., 902 So. 2d 296 (2005)