We found a match
Your institution may have access to this item. Find your institution then sign in to continue.
- Title
MINOR CHILD CANNOT DISAFFIRM ARBITRATION AGREEMENT OF FATHER REQUIRING ARBITRATION OF MALPRACTICE CLAIMS UNDER A FAMILY HEALTH CARE SERVICE CONTRACT WITH MEDICAL GROUP.
- Abstract
This article focuses on ruling given by the Supreme Court of California in the Doyle v. Giuliucci case. Award in an arbitration proceeding initiated by the father as guardian ad litem had dismissed the claim of the minor and judgment had been entered upon the award. In affirming, the Supreme Court said: "The crucial question is whether the power to enter into a contract for medical care that binds the child to arbitrate any dispute arising thereunder is implicit in a parent's right and duty to provide for the care of his child. There are compelling reasons for recognizing that power. Since minors can usually disaffirm their own contracts to pay for medical services, it is unlikely that medical groups would contract directly with them. They can be assured the benefits of group medical service only if parents can contract on their behalf. The arbitration provision in such contracts is a reasonable restriction, for it does no more than specify a forum for the settlement of disputes.
- Subjects
CALIFORNIA; LEGAL judgments; ACTIONS &; defenses (Law); ARBITRATION &; award; MEDICAL care; MINORS
- Publication
Arbitration Journal, 1965, Vol 20, Issue 2, p118
- ISSN
0003-7893
- Publication type
Article