California Supreme Court Limits Use of Arbitration in Nursing Home Wrongful Death Cases
Court clarifies when arbitration agreements apply in nursing home wrongful death cases
LOS ANGELES, CA, UNITED STATES, March 25, 2026 /EINPresswire.com/ -- The California Supreme Court has ruled on the limits of arbitration agreements used in nursing home admissions.
Nursing homes often ask families to sign arbitration agreements during admission that move disputes out of court and away from juries. These provisions are widely used in long-term care admission contracts and have been the subject of ongoing legal disputes across the country.
In Holland v. Silverscreen Healthcare Inc., (2025) 18 Cal. 5th 364, the California Supreme Court addressed when those agreements can be enforced in wrongful death cases.
The case began after the parents of a nursing home resident filed a wrongful death lawsuit alleging neglect, failures in supervision and basic care that led to their son’s death.
The facility sought to enforce an arbitration agreement signed during admission, arguing the dispute should be resolved privately rather than in court. A lower appellate court allowed arbitration, but the California Supreme Court later reversed that decision and addressed when those agreements can be enforced in wrongful death cases.
As a general rule, individuals cannot be forced into arbitration unless they agreed to it.
In Ruiz v. Podolsky (2010) 50 Cal. 4th 838 (RUIZ), the California Supreme Court created an exception. The Court held that in certain medical malpractice cases, a resident’s agreement to arbitration may also apply to wrongful death claims brought by family members—even if those family members did not sign the agreement.
However, the Court clarified that this exception does not apply in every case. When a wrongful death claim is based on neglect—such as failures in supervision, safety, or basic care—arbitration does not apply, and families may pursue their claims in court.
The Court emphasized that long-term care facilities serve dual roles, providing both medical treatment and day-to-day custodial care.
This distinction is important because it preserves a family’s ability to have these claims heard in court, rather than being forced into private arbitration.
The case was argued before the California Supreme Court by lead appellate counsel Joseph S. Klapach of Klapach & Klapach P.C., with attorneys Steven Peck and Adam Peck of the Peck Law Group, APC assisting with briefing and strategy during the Supreme Court proceedings.
Steven Peck said the decision provides important guidance for families seeking accountability when harm occurs in nursing facilities.
Arbitration agreements are widely used in nursing home admissions across California, making the ruling significant for how wrongful death claims involving long-term care facilities may proceed.
The case was later highlighted by the Daily Journal as one of the year’s notable appellate reversals in California.
About the Peck Law Group
The Peck Law Group represents victims of elder abuse and neglect throughout California. The firm handles cases involving nursing home abuse, assisted living neglect, and other forms of mistreatment in long-term care facilities. Its attorneys have more than sixty years of combined experience litigating personal injury cases and holding negligent facilities accountable when residents are harmed.
For more information, visit premierlegal.org or thepecklawgroup.com.
Steven C. Peck, Esq. / Sean Barnett
The Peck Law Group
+1 866-999-9085
stevenpeck@thepecklawgroup.com / seanb@premierlegal.org
Visit us on social media:
LinkedIn
Facebook
YouTube
X
Legal Disclaimer:
EIN Presswire provides this news content "as is" without warranty of any kind. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for the accuracy, content, images, videos, licenses, completeness, legality, or reliability of the information contained in this article. If you have any complaints or copyright issues related to this article, kindly contact the author above.
