Corum v. Roswell Senior Living, LLC
New Mexico Court of Appeals
149 N.M. 287, 248 P.3d 329 (2010)
- Written by Liz Nakamura, JD
Facts
Mary Jo Hebert, decedent, appointed her daughter, Sherri Lynn Corum (plaintiff), as her agent pursuant to a durable financial and medical power of attorney. Three years later, Mary’s husband, Edward Hebert, had Mary admitted to the La Villa nursing home (defendant). As part of Mary’s admission to La Villa, Edward signed an arbitration agreement with La Villa on Mary’s behalf. Before Edward signed the agreement, La Villa made one attempt to contact Corum but gave up when the phone number provided by Edward for Corum turned out to be invalid. Mary’s mental capacity was not medically evaluated prior to Edward signing the agreement. After Mary’s death, Corum filed a wrongful-death lawsuit against La Villa. La Villa moved to compel arbitration, arguing that Edward, as Mary’s surrogate, was authorized to enter a binding arbitration agreement even though Corum was Mary’s agent. Corum challenged, arguing that the arbitration agreement was invalid because Edward, as Mary’s surrogate, only had authority to make healthcare decisions. Corum and La Villa stipulated that (1) Mary lacked capacity when she was admitted to La Villa; and (2) Edward, as Mary’s spouse, was qualified to act as her surrogate. The trial court denied La Villa’s motion to compel arbitration, finding that Edward did not have the power to enter an arbitration agreement.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Robles, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 806,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
