Power of attorney arbitration
Kindred Nursing Centers v. Clark
In brief
The Court rejected Kentucky’s special rule against arbitration agreements but sent part of the case back for another look.
- Where it stands
- Decided
Decided 7-1 · May 15, 2017 · Opinion by Justice Kagan
- What it’s about
- Kentucky refused to enforce arbitration agreements relatives signed for Olive Clark and Joe Wellner under powers of attorney.
- Who it affects
- Kentucky cannot require arbitration-specific permission in a power of attorney as a condition for enforcing an arbitration agreement; the ruling does not automatically make every agent-signed agreement enforceable.
Summary: written with AI from the case record.
What it's about
The Supreme Court ruled the Federal Arbitration Act bars Kentucky’s arbitration-specific rule, overturned part of Kentucky’s decision, wiped out another part (vacated it), and sent the case back (remanded) to reconsider one power of attorney.
Federal law generally requires arbitration agreements to be treated like other contracts.
Question presented
Whether the Federal Arbitration Act preempts a state rule that singles out arbitration agreements for disfavored treatment by requiring that an attorney-in-fact possess specific authority to enter into an arbitration agreement on behalf of a principal?
What the Court decided
Holding
The Kentucky Supreme Court’s clear-statement rule violates the Federal Arbitration Act by singling out arbitration agreements for disfavored treatment. 478 S. W. 3d 306, reversed in part, vacated in part, and remanded.
The Court's reasoning
The Court said Kentucky’s rule treated arbitration agreements less favorably than other contracts. The Federal Arbitration Act requires states to treat them equally.
The vote
From the opinions
“In state-court proceedings, therefore, the FAA does not displace a rule that requires express authorization from a principal before an agent may waive the principal’s right to a jury trial.”
What's next
The Kentucky Supreme Court must reconsider one power of attorney. Whether the agreement signed under it can be enforced remains unresolved.
Documents
Docket activity
New analysis added
AI analysis generated: Impact Analysis
New analysis added
AI analysis generated: Case Briefing
AI analysis generated: Opinion Summary
Show 5 moreShow fewer
AI analysis generated: Decision Record
Case data updated: summary, question_presented, generation_metadata
Case data updated: question_presented, extraction_metadata
Opinion added: Opinion
Brief added: Questions Presented
More questions
- Why did Justice Thomas disagree?
- He said the Federal Arbitration Act does not apply in state-court proceedings, so it could not override Kentucky’s rule.
Sources
Primary materials plus reporting. Best-effort analysis: this explainer relies on a mix of primary materials and trusted secondary sources. Official filings and opinions remain authoritative.