J-S13022-16
NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37
NANCY D. MARTZ, EXECUTRIX OF THE IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF
ESTATE OF HARRY L. OTTO, DECEASED PENNSYLVANIA
Appellee
v.
GOLDEN GATE NATIONAL SENIOR CARE,
LLC, GGNSC ALTOONA HILLVIEW LP,
D/B/A GOLDEN LIVINGCENTER-
HILLVIEW GP LLC,
GGNSC HOLDINGS LLC, GGNSC EQUITY
HOLDINGS, LLC, GGNSC ADMISTRATIVE
SERVICES, LLC, GGNSC CLINICAL
SERVICES, LLC,
DENISE CURRY, AN INDIVIDUAL, AND
ROBERT ETCHELLS, NHA,
Appellants No. 855 WDA 2015
Appeal from the Order Dated May 12, 2015
In the Court of Common Pleas of Blair County
Civil Division at No: 2014-01657
BEFORE: LAZARUS, STABILE, and FITZGERALD,* JJ.
MEMORANDUM BY STABILE, J.: FILED FEBRUARY 25, 2016
Golden Gate National Senior Care, LLC, et al. (collectively, “Golden
Gate”) appeals from the May 12, 2015 order of the Court of Common Pleas
of Blair County (“trial court”), which overruled Golden Gate’s preliminary
objections to compel arbitration of claims brought under the Wrongful Death
____________________________________________
*
Former Justice specially assigned to the Superior Court.
J-S13022-16
and Survival Acts.1 The claims arise from the death of Harry L. Otto, after
he was a resident at a skilled nursing facility operated by Golden Gate.
Relying principally upon our decisions in Taylor v. Extendicare
Health Facilities, Inc., 113 A.3d 317 (Pa. Super. 2015), appeal granted,
112 A.3d 1036 (Pa. 2015), and Tuomi v. Extendicare Inc., 119 A.3d 1030
(Pa. Super. 2015), the trial court found that the arbitration agreement
entered into by Nancy Martz, as a legal representative of decedent, was not
binding upon the non-signatory wrongful death beneficiaries, and they could
not be deemed to have waived their right to a jury trial by the actions of the
decedent’s representative. As such, the trial court determined that the
beneficiaries bringing the wrongful death action in the instant case could not
be compelled to litigate their claims in arbitration. Moreover, the trial court
refused to sever the survival action and compel arbitration on that claim.
Specifically, the trial court noted that survival actions had to be joined with
wrongful death claims under Pa.R.C.P. No. 213(e) and that such joinder did
not violate the Federal Arbitration Act, 9 U.S.C. § 2.
Although Golden Gate admits that Taylor and Tuomi control the
outcome in this case, it nonetheless invites us to reconsider the cases. We,
however, are obliged to decline the invitation. See Regis, Inc. v. All Am.
____________________________________________
1
Respectively, 42 Pa.C.S.A. §§ 8301 and 8302. Though the order is
interlocutory, we have jurisdiction under 42 Pa.C.S.A. § 7320. See
Pa.R.A.P. 311(a)(8).
-2-
J-S13022-16
Rathskeller, Inc., 976 A.2d 1157, 1161 n.6 (Pa. Super. 2009) (quotation
omitted) (“It is beyond the power of a Superior Court panel to overrule a
prior decision of the Superior Court.”); see also Marks v. Nationwide Inc.
Co., 762 A.2d 1098, 1101 (Pa. Super. 2000) (noting that this Court
continues to follow controlling precedent as long as decision has not been
overturned by our Supreme Court), appeal denied, 788 A.2d 381 (Pa.
2001). Based on Taylor and Tuomi, we affirm the trial court’s order
overruling Golden Gate’s preliminary objections.
Order affirmed.
Judgment Entered.
Joseph D. Seletyn, Esq.
Prothonotary
Date: 2/25/2016
-3-