Motion to Compel Arbitration


Greenway Health, LLC, et al. v. Southeast Alabama Rural Health Associates and Sunrise Technology Consultants, LLC et al. v. Southeast Alabama Rural Health Associates, [Ms. 1171046 and 1171061, May 17, 2019] __ So. 3d __ (Ala. 2019). The Court (Bolin, J.; Parker, C.J., and Wise, Sellers, and Stewart, JJ., concur) affirms the Pike Circuit Court’s order denying the Defendants’ motion to compel arbitration in an action brought by Southeast Alabama Rural Health Associates (“SARHA”) alleging that the Defendants failed to properly maintain and protect the protected health information of SARHA. The Defendants contended that SARHA was required to arbitrate its claims against them. Ms. *13.

In rejecting the Defendants’ contention that an arbitration provision in a software licensing agreement required arbitration, the Court noted that “the business associate agreement (“BAA”) (upon which SARHA sued) contains an ‘entire agreement’ clause, which provides that the BAA ‘constitutes the entire agreement and understanding between the Parties with respect to the subject matter hereof and supersedes any prior ... written contracts ... of any nature or kind between the Parties.’” Ms. *20. The BAA did not contain an arbitration provision. Ms. * 9. Consequently, the Court held “we conclude that SARHA cannot be compelled to arbitrate these claims against the Greenway Defendants because the Greenway Defendants have failed to establish the existence of a contract calling for arbitration.” Ms. *22.

Related Documents

Share To: