Leong Ex Rel. Leong v. Kaiser Foundation Hospitals

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concurring with reasoning of Doyle and holding that minor was bound by arbitration provision in contract for medical services signed by father
• concurring with reasoning of Doyle and holding that minor was bound by arbitration provision in contract for medical services signed by father
• relying on Doyle to hold that a minor could not disaffirm an arbitration provision in a contract for medical care signed by his father
• explaining that the “general rule of contract law is that one who assents to a contract is bound by it and cannot complain that he has not read it or did not know what it contained”
• finding that the minor could not disaffirm an 13 See also Cross v. Carnes, 132 Ohio App. 3d 157, 168–69 (1998) (noting that the relevant form was signed by the parent “on behalf of her daughter” and that the parent “consented to the terms of the release on her daughter’s behalf”
• arbitration provision applied to any claims arising out of rendition of services under the contract

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).