Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Hylak v. Manor Care - Pike Creek of Wilmington, De, LLC

Superior Court of Delaware

August 15, 2017

BRIDGET HYLAK, as Power of Attorney for MARLENE HYLAK, Plaintiff
v.
MANOR CARE - PIKE CREEK OF WILMINGTON, DE, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, Defendant.

          Submitted: July 31, 2017

         Upon Defendant's Motion to Dismiss or, in the Alternative, Motion to Stay in Favor of Arbitration DENIED

          ORDER

          Andrea L. Rocanelli, Judge

         This is a negligence cause of action arising from Marlene Hylak's care at Manor Care Pike Creek of Wilmington ("Manor Care"), a rehabilitation center in Wilmington, DE. Upon consideration of the Motion to Dismiss or, in the Alternative, Stay in Favor of Arbitration filed by Manor Care and Plaintiffs opposition thereto; the facts, arguments, and authorities set forth by the parties; the Superior Court Civil Rules; statutory and decisional law; and the entire record in this case, the Court hereby find as follows:

          A. Factual Background

         On April 8, 2015, Marlene Hylak underwent a left total hip replacement surgery. Marlene Hylak was transferred to Manor Care on April 11, 2015 for rehabilitation. In connection with Marlene Hylak's admission to Manor Care, Bridget Hylak ("Plaintiff), Marlene Hylak's daughter, signed a Voluntary Arbitration Agreement ("Agreement") on April 14, 2015 which provides that an arbitration panel, not a court, would resolve all disputes arising out of Marlene Hylak's treatment at Manor Care. Even though Marlene Hylak was fully capable of signing legal documents and verbally communicating, Marlene Hylak never signed the Agreement. Plaintiff did not have legal power of attorney over Marlene Hylak at the time Plaintiff signed the Agreement.

         On April 19, 2015, eight days after Marlene Hylak was admitted to Manor Care, Marlene Hylak complained of increased hip pain in her left hip when she was transferred to her bed by Manor Care staff. The next day, on April 20, 2015, Marlene Hylak complained the pain was worsening. Allegedly, none of Manor Care's employees notified Marlene Hylak's orthopedic surgeon of Marlene Hylak's pain complaints. On April 21, 2015, Marlene Hylak's orthopedic surgeon noted drainage from the incision in Marlene Hylak's left hip. Thereafter, the drainage from Marlene Hylak's left hip continued; Marlene Hylak was admitted to a hospital with an infected incision at her left hip; and surgery was performed to incise and drain the infection. During surgery, the surgeon discovered a fracture of the femur around the previously placed prosthesis. As a result, Marlene Hylak required the removal of the prosthesis and placement of an antibiotic spacer to treat the infection.

         On March 15, 2016, eleven months after Marlene Hylak was initially admitted to Manor Care for rehabilitation, Marlene Hylak executed a Durable General Power of Attorney ("POA") in favor of Plaintiff.

         B. Procedural Posture

         On April 13, 2017, Plaintiff, as Power of Attorney for Marlene Hylak, filed a complaint against Manor Care, alleging negligence, gross negligence, recklessness, and/or willful and wanton behavior by Manor Care, which caused severe injuries to Marlene Hylak, including but not limited to the fractured femur around the recently placed prosthesis.

         On June 9, 2017, Manor Care filed a motion to dismiss or, in the alternative, requested a stay in favor of arbitration. Manor Care claims that Plaintiff agreed to arbitrate any dispute with Manor Care. Accordingly, Defendant's motion challenges this Court's subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to Super. Ct. Civ. R. 12(b)(1).[1]

         On June 30, 2017, Plaintiff filed a response opposing Manor Care's motion on the grounds that Plaintiff had no legal authority to bind Marlene Hylak to voluntary arbitration and/or to waive Marlene Hylak's constitutional right to trial. Plaintiff alleges that Manor Care was well aware that Plaintiff did not have authority as Power of Attorney for Marlene Hylak but told Plaintiff to sign the Agreement anyway.

         C. Legal Standard

         On a motion to dismiss under 12(b)(1), the Court must accept any well-pleaded claims as true and draw all reasonable inferences in the non-movant's favor. A motion to dismiss should be denied unless it appears to a "reasonable certainty" that the plaintiff would not be entitled to ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.