Stay up to date on everything mediation!

Subscribe to our free newsletter,
"This Week in Mediation"

Sign Up Now

Already subscribed No subscription today

SCOTUS Denies Cert in Nursing Home Arbitration Case

by Jill Gross
January 2016


Jill Gross
On Monday, in The Fredericksburg Care Co., L.P. v. Perez, et al., 2016 WL 100844, the Supreme Court declined to review a decision of the Supreme Court of Texas that enforced a pre-dispute arbitration clause in an agreement a patient signed with a nursing home pre-admission.  After the patient died, her family sued the nursing home in state court alleging negligent care and wrongful death.  The nursing home moved to compel arbitration; the trial court denied the motion (and the intermediate appellate court affirmed).  The lower courts reasoned that a Texas law regulating agreements to arbitrate health care liability claims governed the clause, rather than the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA).  The state courts reasoned that the McCarran-Ferguson Act (MFA) protected the state law from preemption.  The MFA exempts from preemption state statutes enacted for the purpose of regulating the business of insurance.

The Texas Supreme Court reversed.  Following a detailed statutory analysis, the court ruled that the Texas law regulating the arbitration agreement was not enacted for the purpose of regulating the business of insurance, and thus the MFA did not exempt that law from FAA preemption.

While the Supreme Court could have denied the petition for a writ of certiorari for many reasons, given the Court’s proclivity towards pro-arbitration decisions, it is not at all surprising that it denied cert. in this case.  It is likely that a majority of the Court would uphold the Texas Supreme Court, as its decision was pro-arbitration and consistent with SCOTUS’ FAA jurisprudence.  Under that jurisprudence, the FAA preempts states’ attempts to restrict the enforcement of arbitration clauses in nursing home agreements.  States that are trying to protect the elderly from arbitration clauses will have to try another route.


Professor Jill I. Gross has been a director of the Investor Rights Clinic (formerly the Securities Arbitration Clinic) since 1999. Professor Gross teaches the Investor Rights Clinic and Seminar, Mediation and Arbitration, and Securities Litigation and Enforcement. She has published numerous law review articles in the area of dispute resolution and investor justice, and has been quoted in the national media on issues relating to securities arbitration. Professor Gross is a public member of the FINRA National Arbitration and Mediation Committee, and is the program co-chair of PIABA’s annual Securities Law Seminar. As Director of Legal Skills, Professor Gross oversees and provides leadership on all matters related to curricular skills training, including writing programs, advocacy programs, and all clinics, externships, and simulations. Professor Gross previously taught as an adjunct professor at Cornell Law School (Arbitration Law) and at Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law (Legal Writing). She is an arbitrator for FINRA Dispute Resolution and the National Futures Association. Professor Gross was an attorney in the New York City firms of Kaye Scholer LLP, Morvillo Abramowitz Grand Iason & Silberberg, and Parcher Hayes & Snyder, representing clients in white collar criminal and securities enforcement proceedings, securities arbitrations, and other commercial litigation.

Email Author
Author Website

Additional articles by Jill Gross