FOURTH D I VI SI ON

DI L LA RD, P. J.

, M ERCI ER and COLVI N, JJ.

N O T IC E : M otions for r e c ons i de r a tion m us t be

ph y sic a l ly r e ce iv ed i n our c le r k ’s offic e w ithin te n

da y s of the da te of de c is ion to be de e m ed tim e ly file d.

https ://w w w

. ga a ppe a ls .us /r ule s

D E A D LIN E S A R E N O LO N G E R TO LLE D IN T

H I S

C O U R T. A LL FILIN G S M U ST B E S U B M I TTE D WITH IN

TH E TIM E S S E T B Y

O U R C O U R T R U LE S

.

June 2, 2021



# I n th e Co u r t o f

A p p eals o f

G eo r g ia

A2 1 A0 17 3 . EM ORY HEALTHCARE, INC. et al . v . FARRELL.

D I LLA R D , Pres i d i n g J u d g e.

Geo rg i a h as a ro bu s t p o l i cy o f fav ori n g t h e res o l u t i o n o f l eg al d i s pu t es t h ro u g h

arb i t rat i on

. Bu t arb i t rat i o n ag reem en t s are s t i l l co n tract s

, an d t h e p res u m p t i o n o f

arb i t rab il i t y

— s t ro n g as i t i s

— can no t di s p l ace t he t rad i t i o n a l ru l es o f co n t ract

fo rm at i o n

. An d here, we are as k ed t o co n s id er t h e co n tract u al effect o f a ho s p i t al ’ s

p ract i ce o f re-p res en t i n g p at i en t s wi t h ad m is s io n fo rm s t h at i n cl u d e an o s t en s i b l y

i n d efi n i te arb i t rat i o n ag reem en t o n an y p rev i ou s ly s i g n ed arb i t rat i on ag reem en t s by

t h o s e p at ien t s

. So

, h ere i s h o w i t wo rk s

. A p at i en t s eek s ad m i t t an ce t o a h o sp i t al fo r

h eal t hcare s erv i ces an d i s p res en t ed wi th p ap erwo rk t o s i g n as a co n d i t i o n o f b ei n g

ad m i t t ed

. Th es e ad m i s s i o n s fo rm s i n cl u de an a r b i t rat io n ag reem en t g o v ern i n g t h i s

v i s i t an d al l fu tu re ad m i tt an ces

. If t h e p at i en t s ig n s t h e arb i trat i o n ag reem en t d u ri n geach h os p i t al s t ay

, t hen t h ere i s n o i s su e as t o t he f o r m a t i o n o f t h o s e ag reem en t s

. Bu t

w h a t i f— as i n t h i s cas e— a p at i en t s i g n s an i n d efi n i t e arb it rat i o n ag reem en t d u ri n g

o n e v i si t

, l at er s eek s ad m i s s i o n fo r ad di t i o n al o r o t h er h e a l t hcare s erv i ces

, i s rep res en t ed wi t h t h e s am e arb i trat i o n ag reem en t

, refu s es t o s ig n i t

, an d i s s t i l l ad m i t t ed

t o th e h o s p i t al ? Can t h e h o s p i t al rel y u p o n t h e p ri o r arb i t rat i o n ag reem en t to fo rce t h e

p at i en t t o arb i t rat e an y cl ai m s ari s i n g o u t o f th e s u b s eq uen t h o s p i t al s t ay ? T h e s h o rt

an s wer i s : No

. By re-p res en t i n g an i n d efi n i t e arb i trat i o n ag reem en t to a p at i en t wh o

h as al read y ex ecu t ed on e, t h e h o s p i t al has co n t ract u al l y ab an d o n ed th e p ri o r

ag reem en t

.

Th i s b ri n gs u s t o Ri ch ard Farrel l’ s l aws u i t ag ai n s t t h e E m o ry Defen d an t s

, 1 in

wh i ch h e al l eg es t h at h e s u ffered i n ju ri es as a res u l t o f t h e d efen d an ts ’ p ro fes s i o n al

n eg li g en ce i n p erfo rm i ng a s u rg i cal p ro ced u re. Th e Em o ry D efen d an t s fi l ed a m o t i o n

t o co m p el arb i t rat i o n b as ed o n an ag reem en t co n t a i n ed in ad m i s si on s p ap erwo rk

s i gn ed b y Farrel l s ev eral m o n t h s earl i er, wh en h e s o ug h t treat m en t un rel at ed t o t h at

at i s s u e i n h i s l aws u i t

. Th e t ri al co u rt d en ied t h e Em o ry Defen d an t s ’ m o t i o n

, an d t h ey

1 Farrel l s u ed Ro b ert M

. Erm en t ro u t

, M .D., Irwi n M

. Bes t

, M

. D., Yo u n i s

Al azzawi

, M .D., E m o ry U n iv ers it y

, E m ory Un i v ers i t y Ho s p i t al

, an d Em o ry

Heal t h care, In c., b u t we refer to t h es e p art ies as t h e “ Em ory Defen dan ts ” fo r t h e s ak e

o f s i m p l i ci t y

.

2n o w ap p eal . In d o i n g s o

, t h ey arg u e t h e tri al co u rt erred i n ru l i ng t h at t hei r p ract i ce

o f re-p res en t i n g an arb it rat i on ag reem en t t o a prev i o u s l y ad m i t t ed p at i en t co n s t i t u t es

an ab an d o n m en t o f an y p ri o r arb i t rat i o n ag reem en t s i g n e d b y t h at p at i en t

. Fo r t h e

reas on s s et fo rt h i nf

r a , we affi rm

.

Th i s C o u r t r e v i e ws t h e g ran t o r d en ial o f a m o ti o n t o co m p el arb i t rat i o n d

e

n o vo to s ee i f t h e t ri al co u rt ’ s d eci s i o n i s co rrect as a m at t er o f l aw; 2 b u t we d efer to

t h e t ri al co u rt ’ s fact u a l f

i n d i n gs u n l es s t h ey are cl earl y erro n eo u s

. 3 So v i ewed

, t h e

reco rd s h o ws t hat i n M arch an d Ap ri l o f 20 1 8

, Farrel l s o u g h t treat m en t wi t h Em o ry

fo r m ed i cal i s s u es o n s ev eral occas i o ns

. Each t i m e, Em o ry p res en t ed Farrel l wi t h an

i d en t i cal Ad m i s s i o n /Reg i s t r a t io n A g reem en t

, wh i ch o u t l i n ed t h e t erm s o f h i s

2 S ee S ch i n a zi v. Ed

en

, 3 5 1 Ga. Ap p

. 1 5 1

, 1 5 6 (8 3 0 SE2 d 5 3 1) (2 0 1 9) (“ [T] h i s

Co u rt rev i ews th e reco rd de n o v o t o d et erm i n e wh et h er t h e t ri al co urt ’ s d en i al o f t h e

m o ti o n t o co m

p el arb i trat io n i s co rrect as a m a t t er o f l aw.” (p u n ct uat i o n o m i t t ed ));

Ki n dr ed Nu r s i n g Ct r s

. Lt d

. P’s h i p v. Ch r z a n o ws ki

, 3 3 8 G a. Ap p. 7 0 8 , 7 08 -0 9 (7 9 1

SE2 d 6 0 1) (2 0 1 6) (s am e).

3 S ee S ch i n a z i

, 3 5 1 Ga. A p p

. at 1 5 6 (“ [W ] e d efer to t h e t r i a l c o urt ’ s fi n d i ng s

o f fact u p o n wh i ch i t s d en i al was b as ed u n l es s t h os e fi n d i n g s are cl earl y erro n eo u s .”);

Ed Vo yl es Je e p

- C h r ys ler

, In c. v. W

a h l s

, 2 94 Ga. Ap p. 8 7 6

, 8 7 7 (6 70 SE2 d 5 4 0 )

(2 0 0 8) (ex p l ai ni ng t h at

, i n co nt ex t o f d et erm in i n g w h et h er a p art y h as wai v ed i t s ri g ht

t o arb it rat e, “ t h e fi n d i n gs u p o n wh ich t h e co n cl us i o n i s b as ed are p red i cat e q u es t i on s

o f fact

, wh i ch m ay no t b e o v ert u rn ed u n les s cl ear l y e rro n eo u s ” (p u n ct u at i o n

o m it t ed )).

3a d m i s s io n

. Parag rap h VI o f t h i s ag reem en t i s t i t l ed “ Ag reem en t t o Al t e r n a t i v e

Di s p ut e Res ol u t i o n ,” an d p ro v i d es as fo l l o ws :

I ag ree t h at an y cl ai m o r di s p ut e ari s i n g o u t o f or rel at ed t o t h e p ro v i s i o n

o f h eal th care s erv i ces t o m e b y Em o ry Un i v ers i t y

, In c. d/ b / a [n u m ero u s

Em o ry -rel at ed en ti t i es ]

, or t h ei r em p l oy ees o r ag en t s (“ Em o ry ”), ex cep t

a s o t h erwi s e p ro v i d ed h erei n

, s h al l b e res o l ved b y fi n al an d b i nd i n g

ar b i t r a t i o n. I ag ree t h at th i s p ro v i s i on i s g o v ern ed b y t h e t erm s o f th e

F e d e r al Arb it rat i on Act

. I u n d ers t an d an d ag ree t hat t h i s ag reem e n t

i n cl u d es an d en co m

p as s es an y cl ai m s ari s i n g o u t o f o r rel at i n g t o h eal t h

care s erv i ces wh i ch s h al l b e p ro v i d ed t o m e u po n t h i s ad m i s s io n as wel l

as al l h eal t h care s erv i ces p ro v id ed t o m e b y Em o ry i n t h e fu t u re,

p ro v i d ed

, h o wev er, t h at t h i s ag reem en t d oes no t i n cl u de an d en co m p as s

an y cl ai m o r d i s p u t e by ei th e r p art y ari s i n g o u t of o r rel at ed t o th e

b i l l i n g o r p ay m en t fo r h eal t h care s erv i ces

. I u n d ers t an d an d ag ree t hat

b y ag reei n g t o arb i t rat e, I am wai v i n g m y ri g h t t o a ju ry t ri al (i f

o t h erwi se av ai l ab le). I un d ers tan d th at t h is ag reem en t i s al s o b i n d i ng o n

an y i n d iv id u al o r en t i t y cl ai m i n g b y o r th ro u gh m e o r o n m y b eh al f. I

u n d ers t an d t h at t h i s ag reem en t i s v o l u n t ary an d i s no t a p reco n d i t i o n t o

recei v i n g h eal th care s erv i ces

. . . . I u nd ers t an d th at I h a v e t h e ri g h t t o

rev o ke t h is ag reem en t n o l at er t h a n t e n (1 0 ) d ay s fo l l o wi ng s i g nat u re

an d t h at

, if I ch o o se t o rev o k e, I m us t req u es t an d ex ecu t e a rev o cat i o n

fo rm wi t h i n t h i s t i m e p eri o d

.

Im m ed i at el y b el o w t h i s p arag rap h i s a d at e an d s i g n at u re l i n e f o r t he p at i en t to

i n d i cat e wh et h er h e o r s h e co n s en t s t o arb i t rat i o n

. An d i m p ort an t l y

, on t h e March an d

4Ap ri l ad m i s s i o n s fo rm s

, Farrel l d id n o t s i g n u n d ern eat h Parag rap h VI. Bu t o n M ay

2 1

, 2 0 1 8

, Farrel l ag a i n s o u g h t t reat m en t wi th Em o ry

, an d o n t h is o ccas i o n

, h e d id

s i gn t h e l i n e u nd ern eat h Parag rap h VI, i n d i cat i n g h i s co n s en t t o arb i t rat i o n

.

Farrel l l at er s o ug h t treat m en t w i t h Em o ry ag ai n o n J u n e 4 an d Au gu s t 6

, 2 0 1 8,

b u t h e d i d n o t si g n h i s s peci fi c co n s en t t o Parag rap h VI o n ei t h er o f t h o s e t wo

ad m i s s i o n s fo rm s

. A n d t h en

, o n Au g u s t 1 8

, 2 01 8

, wh il e s t i l l ad m it t ed an d recei v i n g

t reat m en t u n d er t he Au g u s t 6 ad m i s s i o n fo rm

, Farrel l u n derwen t a Tran s ju g u l ar

In t rah ep a t i c Po rt o s y s t em i c Sh u n t (“ TIPS”) p ro ced u re, 4 du ri n g wh i ch h e cl ai m s t h e

Em o ry Defen d an t s ’ p ro fes s io n al n eg l ig en ce res u l ted i n an i n ju ry to o n e of hi s m ajo r

b l o o d v es s el s

.

Les s t h an o ne y ear l at er, Farrel l fi l ed a m ed ical m al p ract ice l aws u i t ag ai n s t t h e

Em o ry Defen d an t s b as ed o n t h e fo reg o i n g i n ci d en t

, an d t h e d efen d an t s fi l ed s ep arat e

an s wers

. At t h e s am e t i m e, t h e Em o ry Defen dan t s fi l ed m o t i o n s t o d i s m i s s Farrel l ’ s

co m p l a i n t

, o r

, al tern at i v el y

, t o co m p el arb i t rat i o n

. In d oi n g s o

, t h ey arg u ed t h at

4 A Tran s ju g u l ar In t rah ep at i c Po rt o sy st em i c Sh u n t i s a pro ced u re t o creat e n ew

co n nect io n s bet ween t wo b lo od v es s el s i n a p at i en t ’ s l i v er an d

, t h u s

, as s i s t i n t reat i n g

s ev ere l i v er p ro b l em s

. It i s n o t a s u rg i cal p ro ced u re, b u t rat h er, i s d o n e b y an

i n t erv en t i o n al rad i o l o g is t

. Us in g x -ray g ui d an ce, t he r a d i o l o g is t i n s ert s a cat h et er i n to

t h e p at i en t ’ s ju g u l ar v ei n an d t h en g u i d es t h e cat h et er t o a v ei n i n t h e l i v er wh ere t h e

s t en t is p l aced t o co n n ect a p o rt al vei n t o a h ep at i c v ei n

, t h ereb y eas in g b lo o d fl o w.

S ee ht t p s: / /m ed l i n ep l u s .g o v / en cy / art i cl e/ 0 0 7 2 1 0.h t m (l as t v i s i t ed on M ay 2 9

, 2 0 2 1 ).

5Farrel l ’ s M ay 21

, 2 0 1 8 ad m i s s i o n s fo rm s

— wh i ch i n cl u d ed h i s s i g n at u re co n s en t i n g

t o t h e arb i t rat i o n ag reem en t i n Parag rap h VI— req u ired hi m t o s u b m i t t h e m al p ract i ce

cl ai m s ari s i n g ou t o f h i s Au g u s t 6

, 2 0 1 8 ad m i s s i o n t o arb it rat i o n

. Farrel l res p o n d ed

,

an d t h e t ri al co u rt h el d a h eari n g b efo re tak i n g t h e m at t er u n d er ad v i s em en t

.

Su b s eq u en t l y

, t h e co u rt i s s u ed an o rd er d en y i n g t h e Em o ry Defen d an t s ’ m o t i o n to

co m p el arb i t rat i o n b u t al s o g ran t ed t h em a cert i fi cat e o f im m ed i at e rev i ew. W e

g ran t ed t h e Em o ry Defen d an ts ’ ap p l i cat i o n fo r i n terl o cu t o ry rev i ew, an d t h is ap p eal

fo l l o w s

.

Th e Em o ry D efen d an t s co n t en d t h at t h e t ri al co u rt erred i n d e n yi n g t h ei r

m o ti o n s t o co m

p el arb i trat io n

. Sp eci fi cal l y

, t h ey arg u e t h a t t h e co u rt erro n eo u s l y

co n cl u d ed th at p res en t in g an arb i t rat io n ag reem en t w it h ad m i s s i on s fo rm s ev ery t i m e

a p at i en t is ad m i t t ed co n s t i t u t es an ab an do n m en t o f an y ex i s t i n g a r bitr a tion a gr e em en t

s i gn ed i n p rev i o u s ad m i ss i o n s fo rm s . W e d i s ag ree.

It i s w el l es tab l i s h ed t h at

, u n d er b o t h Geo rg i a an d fed eral law, arb i trat i o n i s “ a

m at t er o f co n t ract an d a p art y can n o t b e req u i red t o s u b m i t t o arb i t rat i o n an y d i s p u t e

wh i ch he h as no t ag reed s o t o s u b m i t .” 5 Im p o rt an t ly

, as t he p art i es s eek i n g arb i t rat i o n,

5 Y a t es v. CACV o

f Co l

. LLC

, 3 0 3 G a. Ap p

. 42 5

, 4 3 0 (1 ) (6 9 3 S E 2 d 6 2 9 )

(2 0 1 0) (p u n ct u at i o n o m i t ted ); a cco r d Pi ckl e v. Ra yo n i er Fo r es t Res

., L.P.

, 2 8 2 Ga.

Ap p

. 2 9 5

, 2 9 6 (6 3 8 SE2 d 3 4 4) (2 0 0 6 ); see V o l t In f o

. S ci

. v. Bd

. o f Tr u s t ees o

f Lel a n d

6t h e E m o ry Defen d an t s b ear “ t h e b u rd en o f p ro v i n g t h e ex i s ten ce o f a v a l i d a n d

en fo rceab l e ag reem en t t o arb i t rat e, wh i ch i s gen eral l y go v er n ed b y s t at e l aw

p ri n ci p l es o f co n t ract fo rm at i o n .” 6 So

, w e m us t fi rs t d et erm i n e i f “ t h e co n t ract

l an g u ag e i s am

bi g u o us

, an d

, i f s o

, t hen we ap p l y t h e ap pro p ri at e ru l es o f co ns t ru ct i o n

s et fo rt h i n O CGA § 1 3 -2 -2 .” 7 An d wh i l e am b i g u i t i es i n t h e l an gu ag e of an ag reem en t

“ s h o u l d b e res o l v ed i n fav or o f arb i t rat i o n [,] we do n o t o v erri de t h e cl ear i nt en t o f t h e

p art i es

, o r reach a r e s u l t i nco n s i s t en t wi t h th e p lai n t ex t o f th e co nt ract

, s i m p l y

S t a n f o r d Ju n i o r Un i v.

, 4 89 U .S. 46 8

, 4 7 9 (1 09 SCt 1 2 4 8

, 1 0 3 LE2 d 4 8 8 ) (1 9 8 9 )

(n o t i n g t h a t “ [a] rb i t rat i o n i s a m at t er of co ns en t

, n o t co erci o n [.] ” (p u n ct u at i o n

o m it t ed )).

6 Mer r il l Lyn ch

, Pi er ce, Fen n er & S mi t h

, In c. v. La n da u -Ta

yl o r a s Tr u s t ee of

G a

. S o r t o r Ler a n g is Tr u s t

, 3 5 7 Ga. A p p

. 8 1 8

, 8 2 1 (1 ) (8 4 9 SE2 d 5 0 4 ) ( 2 0 2 0 )

(p u n ct u at i o n o m i t t ed ); a cco r d U n i t ed Hea lt h S

vcs

. o f Ga

., In c. v. A l exa n d

er

, 3 4 2 Ga.

Ap p

. 1

, 2 (2 ) (8 0 2 SE2 d 3 1 4) (2 0 1 7 ); s ee Fi r s t Op ti on s o

f Ch i ca g o

, In c. v. Ka

p l a n

, 5 1 4 U.S. 9 3 8

, 9 4 4 (II) (1 1 5 SCt 1 9 2 0

, 1 3 1 LE2 d 9 8 5 ) (1 9 9 5 ) (“ W h en d eci d i n g

wh et h er t h e p art i es ag reed t o arb i t rat e a cert ai n m at t er (i n cl u di n g arb i t rab i l i t y ), co u rt s

g en eral l y s h o u l d ap pl y ord i n ary s t at e-l aw pri n ci p l es t h at g o v ern t h e f o r m at i o n o f

co n tract s.” (p u n ct u at io n o m i t t ed )); W ed emeyer v. Gu l

f s t r ea m Aer o sp a ce Co r

p

. , 3 2 4

Ga. Ap p

. 4 7

, 5 0 (1 ) ( 7 4 9 S E 2 d 2 4 1 ) (2 0 1 3 ) (“ Arb i t rat i on in Geo rg i a i s a m at t er o f

co n tract

. As s u ch

, t he co n st ru ct i o n o f an arb i t rat i o n cl au s e i n a co n t ract i s s u b ject to

t h e o rd i n ary

ru l es o f co n t ract co n s t ru ct i o n .” (p u nct u at i o n o m i t t ed )).

7 W ed emeyer

, 32 4 Ga. Ap p

. at 5 0 (1 ) (p u n ct u at i o n o m i t t ed ); a cco rd R i c h a r d

Bo wer s & Co . v. Cr eel , 2 8 0 Ga. Ap p . 1 9 9 , 2 0 0 (1 ) (6 3 3 SE2 d 5 5 5 ) (2 0 0 6).

7b ecau s e t h e p o l i cy fav o ri n g arb i t rat i o n i s im pl i cat ed .” 8 In co n t ras t, w h en t h e l an g u ag e

o f a co n t ract i s “ p l ai n an d u n am b i g u o u s

, n o co n s t ru ct i o n i s req u i red or p erm i s s i b l e

an d t h e t erm s o f th e co n t ract m u s t b e g iv en an i n t erp ret at i o n o f o rd i n ary

s i gn i fi can ce.” 9 Fu rt h erm o re, t h e q u es t i o n o f arb it rab i l i t y

— i .e.

, w h et h er an ag reem en t

creat es a d u t y fo r th e p art i es t o arb i t rat e t h e p art i cu l ar gri ev an ce— i s “ u n d en i ab l y an

i s su e fo r ju d i ci al d et erm i n at i o n .” 1 0

In t h i s m at t er, we are n o t cal l ed u p o n t o m i n e t h e v ag ari es o f “ am b i g u i t i es i n

t h e l an g u ag e o f t h e ag reem en t .” 1 1 Rat h er, th e i s s u e i s wh et h er Farrel l co n s en t ed to

arb i t rat e h i s m ed i cal m al p ract i ce cl ai m s. 1 2 An d as p rev i o u s l y n o t ed

, th e Em o ry

Defen d an t s co n t en d th at Farrel l ’ s s i g n ed co ns en t to t h e arb i trat i o n ag reem en t i n h i s

M ay 2 1

, 20 1 8 ad m i s s i on s fo rm s ap p l i ed t o al l fu t u re ad m i s s i o ns fo r t reat m en t wi th

8 E.E.O.C. v. W

af fl e H o us e, In c.

, 5 34 U.S

. 2 7 9

, 2 9 4 (IV) (1 2 2 SCt 7 5 4

, 1 5 1

LE2 d 7 5 5) (2 0 0 2 ) (p u nct u at i o n o m i t t ed ).

9 W ed emeyer

, 3 2 4 Ga. Ap p

. at 50 (1 ) (p u n ct uat i o n o m i tt ed ); a cco r d Cr eel

, 2 8 0

Ga. Ap p . at 2 0 0 (1 ).

1 0 Y a t es

, 3 0 3 Ga. Ap p

. at 4 3 0 (1 ) (p un ct u at io n o m i tt ed ); a cco r d Pi ckl e

, 2 8 2 Ga.

Ap p . at 2 9 6

.

1 1 W a f f l e Ho us e

, 5 3 4 U.S. at 2 9 4 (IV).

1 2 S ee GGNS C Lo u i s vi l l e Hi l l cr eek, LLC v. Es t a t e o f Br a mer

, 9 3 2 F.3 d 4 8 0,

4 8 5 (II) (A) (6 t h Ci r. 2 0 19 ) (“ An ag reem en t t o arb i t rat e i s fu n d am en t al l y a m at t er o f

co n sen t .”).

8Em o ry

. T h ey m ai n t ai n t h at t h e s u b s eq u en t pres en t at i o n t o Farrel l o f i d e n t i c a l

ad m i s s i o n s fo rm s

— i n w h ich h e d id n o t si g n t h e arb i t rat i on ag reem en t fo r t h e

ad m i s s i o n d u ri n g wh i ch h e s u ffered h i s i n ju ry

— i s o f n o co n s eq u en ce. M ore s i m p l y

p u t

, t h e Em o ry Defen d an ts arg u e t h at re-p res en t i n g t h e i d en t i cal ad m i s si o n s fo rm s

h ad n o effect o n t h e p rev io u s l y s i g n e d arb i trat i o n ag reem en t

. W e d is ag ree. By rep res en t i ng t h e arb i trat io n a g reem en t t o Ferrel l each t i m e h e s o u g h t t reat m en t

, t h e

Em o ry Defen d a n t s en g ag ed i n b eh av io r u n m i s t ak ab l y d em o n s t rat i n g t h ei r

ab an do n m en t o f t he p ri o r ag reem en t

. 1 3

Un d er G e o r g i a l aw, p art i es m ay “ b y m ut u al co n s en t ab an do n an ex i s t i n g

co n tract b et ween t h em s o as t o m ak e i t n o t t h ereaft er b i n d i n g a n d t h e co nt ract m ay

1 3 S ee Br a mer

, 9 3 2 F3 d at 4 8 6 -8 9 (II) (B) (h o ld i n g t h at n u rs i n g h o m e

o p erat o r’ s co n d u ct in p res en t i n g, each t i m e res id en t was read m i tt ed t o n u rs i n g h o m e,

t h e s am e a r

bitr a t i o n ag reem en t th at h ad b een ex ecu ted fo r res i d en t’ s i n i ti al ad m i s s i o n,

d es p it e fact t h at each arb i t rat i o n ag reem en t co nt ai ned a cl au se s t a t i n g t h at t h e

ag reem en t wo u l d rem ai n i n effect aft er d i s ch arg e an d read m i s s i o n

, co u p l ed wi th

res i den t ’ s refu s al t o s i g n arb i t rat i o n ag reem en t fo r s eco n d read m i s s i on

, u n m i s t ak ab l y

s h o wed t h at n o p ri o r ag reem en t co n t ro l l ed wh en res i d en t was read m i t t ed fo r a s eco n d

t i m e). Im p o rt an t l y

, o u r Su p rem e Co u rt has h el d t h at we m ay lo o k to fed eral cas e l aw

fo r g ui d an ce i n arb it rat i on cas es s u ch as th i s on e. See Br o okf i el d Co u n t r

y Cl u b

, In c.

v. S t

. J a m e s

- Br o o kf

i el d

, LLC

, 2 8 7 Ga. 40 8

, 4 1 2 (1 ) (6 9 6 SE2 d 6 6 3 ) (2 0 1 0 ) (n o t i n g

t h at “ [b ] ecau s e ou r s t at e arb i t rat i o n co d e cl o s el y t rack s fed eral arb i t rat i on l aw, we

l o o k t o fed eral cas es fo r g u i d an ce i n c o n st ru in g o u r o wn st at ut es ” (p u n ct u at i o n

o m it t ed )).

9b e res ci n d ed b y co n d u ct as wel l a s b y w o r d s

. ” 1 4 In d eed

, fo r p u rp o ses of res ci s s i o n,

a m eet i n g o f t h e m i nd s m ay b e s h o wn by “ t h e co n d uct o f o n e p art y i n co ns i s t en t wi th

t h e co n t i n u ed ex i s t en ce o f a co n t ract

, o r ab an do n m en t o r rep u d i at io n o f t h e co n t ract

,

an d k n o wl ed g e o f, an d acq u i es cen ce t o

, s u ch a b a n do n m en t o r rep u d i at i o n b y t h e

o t h er.” 1 5 An d h ere, t h e E m o r y Defen d an t s ’ co n d uct i n re-p res en t i ng an i d en t i cal

arb i t rat i on ag reem en t i n t h e A u g u s t 6

, 2 0 18 ad m i s s i o n s fo rm s i s b eh av i o r

fu n d am en t al l y i n co n s is t en t wi t h t h e co n t i n u ed v iab i l i t y o f t h e earl i er i d en t i cal

arb i t rat i on ag reem en t, wh i ch Farrel l s i g n ed i n t h e M ay 21

, 2 0 1 8 ad m i ss i o n s fo rm s

. 1 6

In d eed

, each n ew p res en t at i o n of t h e arb i t rat i o n ag reem en t b y t h e E m ory Defen d an t s

1 4 W o r ks i t eRX, LLC v. Dr Ta ng o

, In c.

, 2 8 6 Ga. Ap p

. 2 8 4

, 2 8 5 (6 4 8 SE2 d 7 7 5 )

(2 0 0 7) (p u n ct u at i o n o m i t t ed ); a cco r d C. Br o wn Tr ucki n g Co

., In c. v. Hen der s o n

, 3 0 5

Ga. Ap p

. 8 7 3

, 8 7 4 (1 ) (7 00 SE2 d 8 8 2 ) (2 0 1 0 ); s ee W i s e v. Ti d a l Co n s t r

. Co

., In c.

, 2 6 1

Ga. Ap p

. 6 7 0

, 6 75 (2 ) (5 8 3 SE2 d 48 6 ) (2 0 03 ) (“ A n ag reem en t t o arb i t rat e is wai v ed

b y an y act i o n of a p art y wh i ch is i n co n si s t en t wi t h t h e ri gh t o f arb i t r a t i o n .”

(p u n ct u at i o n o m i t t ed ).

1 5 Es t a te o f Br a mer

, 9 3 2 F3 d at 4 8 7 (II) (B) (p u n ct uat i o n o m i t t ed ).

1 6 S ee i d

. (fi n di ng t h at n u rs i n g h o m e op erat o r p res en t i n g res i d en t w i t h an

i d en t i cal ag reem en t i n t h e ad m i s s i o n s p ack e t i s an act fu n dam en tal l y i n co n s i s t en t

wi t h t h e co n t i n u ed ex i s t en ce o f an earl i er i d en t ical ag reem en t ).

10t o Farrel l “ co ns t it u t ed a n ew o ffer th at i s i nco n s i s t en t wi t h a co nt rac t b ei n g in

fo rce.” 1 7

Ev en s o

, t h e Em o ry De f en d an t s h i n ge t hei r arg u m en t o n l an g u ag e i n t h e

arb i t rat i on ag reem en t i nd i cat i n g t h at i t ap p l i es t o al l fu t u re h eal th care s erv i ces

.

Sp eci fi cal l y

, th ey m ai n t ai n t h at re-p res en t i n g t h e id en t i cal ag reem en t

— wh i ch Farrel l

d i d n o t s ig n

— i n l at er ad m i ss i o n s fo rm s d i d n ot am o u n t t o an ab an do n m en t 1 8 o f t h e

earl ier s i g ned ag ree m e n t b ut i s m erel y a w ay to “ en s ure th e b ro ad es t p o s s i b l e

d i s s em i n at io n o f t h e o ffer to arb i t rat e am o n g t h e pat i en t p op u lat i on .” Th i s co n t en t i o n

1 7 Id

. Cf

. Po wel l v. No r ma n E l ec. Ga l a xy, In c.

, 2 2 9 G a. Ap p

. 99

, 10 1 (1 ) (4 9 3

SE2 d 2 0 5 ) (1 9 97 ) (“ An ex is t in g co n t ract i s s u p ers ed ed an d d i s ch arg ed wh en ev er t h e

p art i e s s u b s eq u en t l y en t er u p o n a v al i d an d i n co ns i s ten t ag reem en t co m p l et el y

co v eri n g t he s u b

ject m at t er em

b raced b y t h e o ri gi n al co n t ract .” (p u n ct u at i o n

o m it t ed )).

1 8 T he Em o ry Defen d an t s al s o at t em p t t o b o ls ter t h ei r arg u m en t t h at t h e

ag reem en t h as n o t b een ab an d o n ed b y n o t i n g th at i n cas es i n wh ich we hav e h el d t h at

wai v er o f an arb i t rat i o n ri g h t o ccu rred

, th e p art y s eek i n g t o rel y o n an arb i t rat i o n

cl au s e d i d n o t pro m

p t l y i n vo ke o r s eek t o en fo rce t h e cl au s e, an d co n t ras t i n g t h o s e

cas es t o t h ei r co n d uct h e r e

, in wh i ch t h ey d i d p ro m p t l y s eek t o arb i t rat e. S

ee, e.g

. , W i s e

, 2 61 Ga. Ap p

. at 6 7 5 (2 ) (t h e p art y s eek i n g t o en fo rce t h e arb i t rat i o n ag reem en t

“ s o u g h t t o h av e bo t h li t i g at i on s h o rt o f t ri al an d arb i t rat i o n t o av o i d a ju ry t ri al

, wh i ch

i s g ro s s l y i n co ns i s t en t w i t h t h e in h eren t p u rp o s e fo r arb i t rat i o n .”). Bu t t h es e cas es are

i n ap p o s it e b ecau s e o u r h o l d i n g d o es n o t res t o n t h e Em o ry Defen d an t s b ei n g d i l at o ry

i n s eek i n g t o arb it rat e. Rat h er, o u r d eci s i o n i s b as ed o n t h es e d efen d an t s re-p res en t i n g

Farrel l wi t h a n ew arb i t rat i o n ag reem en t

, wh i ch h e d i d n o t s i g n

, an d wh i ch res u l t ed

i n t he p rev io u s ag reem en t b ei n g ab an d o n ed

.

11i s a n o n s t art er. In d eed

, d es p it e t h e Em o ry Defen d an t s ’ p o s t h oc rat io n al e t o s eem i n g l y

v ei l a h ead s -we-wi n -t ai ls -y o u -l o s e o u t co m e, we ag ree wi t h t he t ri al co u rt t h at t h e rep res en t m en t o f t h e arb it rat i o n ag reem en t u n eq ui v o cal l y a n d o b ject i v el y ev i n ces an

i n t e n t t o o ffer t h e read m i t t ed p at i en t wi t h a n ew op p ort u n it y t o ch o o s e o r reject

arb i t rat i on

. Ot h erwi s e, re-p res en t m en t of th e i den t i cal ag reem en t o ffers t h e p at i en t a

ch o ice th ey are n o t co n t ract u al l y al l owed to m ak e, or a ch o i ce t hat i s m ean i n g l es s

.

Th i s

, of co u rs e, wo u l d ru n afo u l o f Geo rg i a l aw, wh i ch “ req u i res u s t o g i v e m ean i n g

t o ev ery t e r m o f a co n t ract rat h er t h an co n s t ru e an y t erm as m ean i n g l es s

, an d to

co n st ru e a co n t ract s o as t o u p h o l d t he co n tract i n wh o l e an d in ev ery p art [.] ” 1 9 An d

t h at i s ex act l y wh at we wi l l d o h ere.

1 9 Ci ty o f Al ba n y v. Do u g h er t

y Ct y.

, 3 5 2 Ga. A p p

. 6 6 4, 6 6 8 (2 ) (8 35 SE2 d 6 8 1 )

(2 0 1 9) (p u n ct u at i o n o m it t ed ); s ee Do h n v. Do h n , 2 7 6 Ga. 8 2 6

, 8 2 8 (5 8 4 SE2 d 2 5 0 )

(2 0 0 3) (“ In ap p l y i n g t h e ru l es o f co n s t ru c t i o n o f c o n t ract s

, we l o o k t o t h at

co n st ru ct i o n wh i ch wi l l u p h o l d t h e co n t ract as a wh ol e an d n o t m ak e an y p ro v i s i o n

m ean i n g l es s .” (p u n ct u at i o n o m i t t ed )); Mi l l i ken & Co

. v. Ga

. P ower Co

. , 3 5 4 Ga. Ap p.

9 8

, 1 0 0 (8 3 9 SE2 d 3 0 6) (2 02 0 ) (“ It i s a card in al ru l e o f co n t ract co ns t ru ct i o n t h at a

co u rt s h ou l d

, i f po s s i b l e, co n s t ru e a co n t ract s o as n ot t o ren d er an y o f i t s p ro v i s i on s

m ean i n g l es s an d i n a m an ner t h at g i v e s e f f e c t t o al l o f t he co n t ract ual t erm s .”

(p u n ct u at i o n o m i t t ed )).

12So

, a l th o u g h t he arb i t rat i o n ag reem en t l an g u ag e i n t h e M ay 21

, 2 0 1 8

a d m i s s i o n s fo rm s d i d n o t req u i re i t to d o s o, 2 0 Em o ry p res en t ed Farrel l wi t h a n e w

(al b ei t i d en t i cal ) arb i t rat i o n ag reem en t i n t h e Au gu s t 6

, 20 1 8 ad m i s s io n s fo rm s an d,

t h erefo re, ab an d on ed t h e p rev i o u s o n e. An d b y el ect i n g n o t t o s i g n t he n ew arb i t rat i o n

ag reem en t

, Farrel l acq ui es ced i n t h e Em o ry Defen d an t s ’ ab an d on m en t of t h e earl i er

ag reem en t

. 2 1 As a res u l t

, t h ere was n o ag reem en t t o arb i trat e i n ex i s t en ce as o f Au g u s t

6

, 2 0 1 8

, an d t h e t ri al co u rt d i d n o t err i n d en y i n g t h e Em o ry Defen d an t s ’ m o t i o n to

co m p el arb i t rat i on

.

Fo r al l t h es e reas o n s , we affi rm t he t ri al co u rt ’ s ju d g m en t

.

Ju d g men t a f f i r m ed . Mer ci er

a n d Co lvi n , JJ., co n cu r

.

2 0 Farrel l d o es n ot arg u e t h at i n d efi ni te o r i n fi n i t e arb it rat i o n ag reem en t s l i k e

t h e o n e b efo re u s are un co n sci o n ab l e, s o n ot h i n g i n t h i s o p i n io n sh o ul d b e u n d ers t o o d

as ei t her u p h ol d i n g o r reject i n g t h e l eg al i t y o f s u ch ag reem en ts o r cl au s es

.

2 1 S e e s u p r a no t e 1 3 ; s ee a l

s o Po wel l

, 2 2 9 Ga. Ap p. at 1 0 1 (1 ) (“ An ex i s t i n g

co n tract i s s u p ers ed ed an d d i sch arg ed wh en ev er t h e part i es su b seq u en t l y en t er u p o n

a v al i d an d i n co n s i s t en t ag reem en t co m p l et el y co v eri n g t h e s u b

ject m at t er em

b raced

b y t h e o ri g i n al co n tract .” (p u n ct u at i on o m i t t ed ))

13