Arbitration Clause • Whistleblower Law • Public Policy • Tort Claims • Contract Claims

Saltzman v. Thomas Jefferson Univ. Hosp., Inc., PICS Case No. 17-1039 (Pa. Super. June 30, 2017) Moulton, J. (24 pages

Trial court erred in finding that there was no enforceable arbitration agreement between appellee and hospital because there was no blanket prohibition on the arbitration of whistleblower claims, a public forum was not necessary to preserve the deterrent function of that law and the broad language of the clause applied to all claims relating to or arising from the parties' contractual relationship, not just claims arising from an alleged breach of the agreement. Reversed.

Appellee worked for medical practice at appellant hospital under physician service agreement that contained an arbitration clause. She asserted that she was terminated after she reported that hospital was holding forth a chiropractor as a licensed doctor of medicine and delegating medical responsibilities to him. She sued alleging retaliation in violation of the whistleblower law and common law wrongful termination. Hospital filed preliminary objections seeking to compel arbitration and the trial court overruled the objections because hospital was not a party to the physician service agreement, the agreement was an unconscionable contract of adhesion and that compelling arbitration was incompatible with the functions of the whistleblower law. Hospital appealed.