No specific laws identified for this ruling.
Supreme Court of South Carolina reversed the Court of Appeals, holding that the attorney-in-fact lacked authority to sign the arbitration agreement on behalf of the facility resident, rendering the arbitration agreement unenforceable.
This appeal concerns the enforceability of an arbitration agreement executed between Ashley River Plantation, an assisted-living facility, and Thayer Arredondo, the attorney-in-fact under two powers of attorney executed by Hubert Whaley, a facility resident. In an unpublished opinion, the court of appeals held the arbitration agreement was enforceable. Arredondo v. SNH SE Ashley River Tenant, LLC, Op. No. 2019-UP-293 (S.C. Ct. App. filed Aug. 14, 2019). We reverse the court of appeals and hold neither power of attorney gave Arredondo the authority to sign the arbitration agreement.
What Happened
This case involved a dispute over whether an arbitration agreement was valid at Ashley River Plantation, an assisted-living facility. When resident Hubert Whaley moved into the facility, his attorney-in-fact (someone legally authorized to act on his behalf) Thayer Arredondo signed an arbitration agreement with the facility. Arbitration agreements require disputes to be resolved through private arbitration rather than in court. Later, when a legal dispute arose, the facility tried to enforce this arbitration agreement to avoid going to court.
What the Court Decided
The South Carolina Supreme Court ruled that the arbitration agreement was invalid and unenforceable. The court found that Arredondo, acting as attorney-in-fact, did not have the proper legal authority to sign the arbitration agreement on Whaley's behalf. This overturned a lower court decision that had said the agreement was valid.
Why This Matters for Workers
This ruling protects workers and residents in care facilities by ensuring that arbitration agreements cannot be improperly signed by third parties. It means that just because someone has power of attorney doesn't automatically give them authority to sign away another person's right to go to court. Workers should know that arbitration agreements must be properly executed to be enforceable.
This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.
Other orders and opinions in Arredondo from the same court.
For eighty-two years, this Court struggled to correctly apply the "statutory employee doctrine." Today, following our more recent decisions on the statutory employee doctrine, we apply the doctrine in light of the General Assembly's original purpose for enacting it. We find the circuit court and…
In this appeal arising out of Anderson County Council's approval of a severance agreement, the Court vacates the decision of the Court of Appeals finds the Severance Agreement invalid due to the County's lack of a quorum and remands to the circuit court to determine the exact amount that Preston…
Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 3 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.
This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes, claim types, and summaries are extracted using AI analysis and may be incomplete or inaccurate. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.
See something wrong, or named in this ruling and want it corrected or redacted? Request a correction.