AI Generated Opinion Summaries

This summary was computer-generated without any editorial revision. It is not official, has not been checked for accuracy, and is NOT citable.

Facts

• The case involves a wrongful death suit filed by Cornelia Rosenquist, the wife of the deceased Sture Rosenquist, against Genesis Healthcare, LLC, Peak Medical New Mexico No. 3, Inc., and Lisa Hanchett. The suit arose after Mr. Rosenquist was admitted to Las Palomas Care and Rehabilitation Center, where he stayed for eight days before being hospitalized and subsequently passing away within the same month. Mrs. Rosenquist signed an arbitration agreement and other admission documents on behalf of her husband upon his admission to the facility. The defendants sought to enforce this arbitration agreement, which Mrs. Rosenquist contested, arguing she did not have the authority to bind her husband to the agreement (paras 2-4).

Procedural History

• [Not applicable or not found]

Parties' Submissions

• Plaintiff-Appellee: Argued that there was no valid contract as Mrs. Rosenquist did not have the authority to agree to arbitration on her husband's behalf and claimed the agreement was both procedurally and substantively unconscionable (para 4).
• Defendants-Appellants: Sought to enforce the arbitration agreement, arguing it was voluntary and that Mrs. Rosenquist had the authority to sign on behalf of her husband. They also contended that the lack of revocation of authority by Mrs. Rosenquist or the Decedent supported their position (paras 3, 5).

Legal Issues

• Whether Mrs. Rosenquist had the authority to sign the arbitration agreement on behalf of her husband, thereby binding his estate to arbitration.
• Whether the arbitration agreement was procedurally or substantively unconscionable.

Disposition

• The district court's denial of the motion to compel arbitration was affirmed (para 1).

Reasons

• The Court of Appeals, with Judge Jacqueline R. Medina writing, concurred by Judges Linda M. Vanzi and Briana H. Zamora, found that the Defendants failed to establish that Mrs. Rosenquist had the authority to sign the arbitration agreement on behalf of her husband. The court noted that there was no evidence of Mr. Rosenquist's actions suggesting Mrs. Rosenquist was his agent or had authority to sign his admission paperwork. The court also highlighted that Defendants did not present any evidence that Mr. Rosenquist knew Mrs. Rosenquist signed the admission documents or the agreement. The court distinguished this case from others cited by Defendants, noting the lack of evidence of Mr. Rosenquist's desire to be admitted to the facility or that he routinely allowed Mrs. Rosenquist to sign documents on his behalf. The court declined Defendants' request to remand for further discovery on the agreement's enforceability, noting Defendants did not explain how they were prevented from deposing Mrs. Rosenquist or how the district court's actions inhibited their ability to conduct discovery (paras 13-26).