Opinion ID: 2338924
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: Rogers' dispute is governed by the 2007 EOC with Pacificare

Text: Pacificare is one of approximately 30 private companies that currently offer MA plans in Nevada. Rogers enrolled in Pacificare's 2007 and 2008 plans and received an EOC for each year. While the 2007 EOC contained an arbitration provision, the 2008 EOC did not. The parties agree that Rogers underwent a medical procedure that allegedly resulted in her hepatitis C infection in January 2007. However, because Rogers did not discover her injury until 2008, the parties disagree as to whether the 2007 or 2008 contract governs. Specifically, Pacificare contends that the 2007 arbitration agreement governs Rogers' dispute because the alleged injuries resulted from services rendered in 2007 and the contract governs any and all disputes arising between January 1, 2007, and December 31, 2007. Conversely, Rogers contends that the 2008 contractwhich did not contain an arbitration provisionexplicitly replaced the expired 2007 agreement and thus governs her claims. This court reviews issues of contract interpretation de novo. See Phillips v. Parker, 106 Nev. 415, 417, 794 P.2d 716, 718 (1990). We have not considered whether an arbitration provision may survive the expiration of the contract in which it is contained. However, it is generally accepted that the expiration of a contract does not necessarily terminate arbitration provisions included therein. See Nolde Bros., Inc. v. Bakery Workers, 430 U.S. 243, 252, 97 S.Ct. 1067, 51 L.Ed.2d 300 (1977) ([T]he parties' obligations under their arbitration clause survived contract termination when the dispute was over an obligation arguably created by the expired agreement.). After reviewing the relevant contractual documents, we conclude that the parties' 2007 arbitration agreement governs the dispute at issue. The 2007 contract mandated arbitration for any and all disputes, specifically including disputes over ANY MEDICAL SERVICES RENDERED UNDER THIS CONTRACT. This language covers the allegations asserted by Rogers here because they are based on medical services rendered in January 2007. As such, the obligations involving Rogers' medical procedure were created by the terms of the expired contract, including the arbitration clause. Absent the explicit intention to rescind an arbitration clause, ... the clause will survive even where the prior agreement itself is rescinded by the latter agreement. Homestake Lead Co. of Mo. v. Doe Run Resources, 282 F.Supp.2d 1131, 1142 (N.D.Cal.2003). Therefore, in order to effectively terminate an arbitration provision in an expired contract, the parties must expressly rescind the arbitration provision itselfnot simply the contract in which the provision is contained. Id. In this case, the 2008 contract contained generic language purporting to replace all prior contracts. This language did not expressly rescind the parties' 2007 arbitration agreement under which the obligations in this case were created. Because the 2007 arbitration provision was not explicitly rescinded, the provision survived the expiration of the 2007 contract and its replacement by the 2008 contract. Therefore, unless the district court's unconscionability analysis is upheld, Rogers' claims are subject to mandatory arbitration under the 2007 contract. [3]