California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from Valbuena v. Walker, G054231 (Cal. App. 2018):
However, nothing in section 1295 states medical malpractice agreements may not include additional provisions. (Coon v. Nicola (1993) 17 Cal.App.4th 1225, 1232.) "In fact the wording of subdivision (a) is indicative of this when it requires mandatory language to be set forth in the 'first article of the contract.' The implication here is that other articles may be added depending upon the needs of the parties." (Ibid.) There is no specification in section 1295 as to where a clause agreeing to arbitrate future disputes must be located in the agreement. If not specified, we see no reason why the parties could not include the "future disputes" provision in Article 5, which was devoted to describing the duration of the agreement.2 Our Supreme Court in Reigelsperger
Page 7
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.