Integrated Health Services of Green Briar, Inc. v. Lopez-Silvero

827 So. 2d 338, 2002 WL 31159417
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedSeptember 30, 2002
Docket3D02-1337
StatusPublished
Cited by24 cases

This text of 827 So. 2d 338 (Integrated Health Services of Green Briar, Inc. v. Lopez-Silvero) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Integrated Health Services of Green Briar, Inc. v. Lopez-Silvero, 827 So. 2d 338, 2002 WL 31159417 (Fla. Ct. App. 2002).

Opinion

827 So.2d 338 (2002)

INTEGRATED HEALTH SERVICES OF GREEN BRIAR, INC., Appellant,
v.
Ernesto LOPEZ-SILVERO and Sandra Lopez-Silvero, his wife, Appellees.

No. 3D02-1337.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

September 30, 2002.

Hardeman & Suarez, and Richard A. Warren, Miami, for appellant.

Freidin & Brown, and Robert D. Brown, for appellees.

Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and GERSTEN and SORONDO, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Appellant Integrated Health Services of Greenbriar, Inc., ("IHS"), appeals a nonfinal order denying its motion to compel arbitration. We reverse.

Appellee, Ernesto-Lopez Silvero ("resident"), signed an admission contract for the provision of nursing care in a nursing home owned by IHS. The admission contract provided for arbitration in the event of any disputes or claims. Since there was no place provided on the contract for the nursing home's signature, the admission contract was not signed by IHS. However, both IHS and the resident signed five other documents that same day, both agreeing to the provision of nursing home services.

The resident stayed at the home for over two months. One month after the resident left the nursing home, he and his wife filed suit against IHS, alleging that IHS did not properly care for the resident when he stayed at the nursing home.

IHS moved to dismiss the complaint or, alternatively, to compel arbitration and stay the complaint, based on the arbitration *339 clause of the admission contract. After a non-evidentiary hearing, the trial court denied IHS's motion to compel arbitration.

A contract is binding, despite the fact that one party did not sign the contract, where both parties have performed under the contract. See Gateway Cable T.V., Inc. v. Vikoa Contruction Corp., 253 So.2d 461 (Fla. 1st DCA 1971). As noted in Gateway Cable T.V., Inc. v. Vikoa Contruction Corp., 253 So.2d at 463, "A contract may be binding on a party despite the absence of a party's signature. The object of a signature is to show mutuality or assent, but these facts may be shown in other ways, for example, by the acts or conduct of the parties." See also Sosa v. Shearform Mfg., 784 So.2d 609 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001) (parties may be bound to the provisions of an unsigned contract if they acted as though the provisions of the contract were in force.)

Here, both the resident and IHS acted as if they had a valid contract. IHS performed under the contract by admitting the resident and providing him with nursing home care for over two months. Moreover, IHS signed five other documents relating to the resident's admission, which were incorporated by reference in the admission contract. Clearly IHS assented to the terms of the admission contract, including its arbitration clause.

Accordingly, we reverse the order below and remand with instructions to the trial court to grant the motion for arbitration. See Sosa v. Shearform Mfg., 784 So.2d at 609; Security Management Corp. v. Hartford Fire Ins. Co., 641 So.2d 184 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994); James Register Constr. Co. v. Bobby Hancock Acoustics, Inc., 535 So.2d 339 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988).

Reversed and remanded with instructions.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

KK-PB Financial, LLC v. Salazar Law, LLP
District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2026
Cnj Realty Associates, LLC v. Yankiv, Yankiv
District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2025
Shai Morali v. Amanda Mayan
District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2024
Hager v. Willis
S.D. Alabama, 2020
Fonseca v. Taverna Imports, Inc.
212 So. 3d 431 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2017)
CT Miami, LLC v. Samsung Electronics Latinoamerica Miami, Inc.
201 So. 3d 85 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2015)
Burton W. Wiand v. Roberta Schneiderman
778 F.3d 917 (Eleventh Circuit, 2015)
Sovereign Healthcare of Tampa, LLC v. Estate of Yarawsky Ex Rel. Yarawsky
150 So. 3d 873 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2014)
Mendez v. Hampton Court Nursing Center, LLC
140 So. 3d 671 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2014)
Manorcare Health Services, Inc. v. Stiehl
22 So. 3d 96 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2009)
City of Orlando v. West Orange Country Club, Inc.
9 So. 3d 1268 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2009)
Comcast Spotlight, Inc. v. EVENTYS MARKETING AND PRODUCTS, INC.
984 So. 2d 631 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2008)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
827 So. 2d 338, 2002 WL 31159417, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/integrated-health-services-of-green-briar-inc-v-lopez-silvero-fladistctapp-2002.