IHS Acquisition No. 171, Inc. D/B/A Mesa Hills Specialty Hospital, Encore Healthcare, LLC, and Lyric Health Care Holdings III, Inc. v. JoAnn Beatty-Ortiz, 387 S.W.3d 799

Beatty-Ortiz was employed by IHS Acquisition No. 171 d/b/a Mesa Hills Specialty Hospital from 2000 until her termination on February 3, 2010.
Beatty filed a Texas Workforce Commission complaint on March 31, 2010 alleging ongoing gender discrimination by her employer.
Beatty filed suit against Appellants in October 2010 alleging the same discrimination claims.
Appellants moved to compel arbitration, attaching a September 23, 2008 Mutual Arbitration Agreement.
The Agreement appears to name IHS Acquisition No. 174 as Employer, but Beatty was employed by IHS Acquisition No. 171, creating a misnomer argument.
The trial court denied arbitration, and Appellants appealed the denial.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Gateway issues to arbitration or court.	Beatty contends a court should decide arbitrability (formation/validity).	Appellants contend the agreement delegates gateway issues to the arbitrator.	Court held gateway issues to arbitration per delegation provision.
Effect of misnomer on enforceability.	Beatty argues misnomer defeats enforceability of the arbitration agreement.	Appellants argue misnomer does not defeat, since conduct shows mutual assent.	Misnomer does not void the arbitration agreement; arbitration proceeds.

Rent-A-Center West, Inc. v. Jackson, 561 U.S. 63 (2010) (delegation and gateway issue framework under FAA)
First Options of Chicago, Inc. v. Kaplan, 514 U.S. 938 (1995) (questions of arbitrability depend on what parties agreed)
AT&T Technologies, Inc. v. Communications Workers, 475 U.S. 643 (1986) (parties may delegate arbitrability to arbitrator)
J.M. Davidson, Inc. v. Webster, 128 S.W.3d 223 (Tex. 2003) (contract formation and arbitration enforcement)
In re Palm Harbor Homes, Inc., 195 S.W.3d 672 (Tex. 2006) (formation of arbitration contracts under Texas law)
In re AdvancePCS Health L.P., 172 S.W.3d 603 (Tex. 2005) (mutual promises as consideration for arbitration)
In re Halliburton Co., 80 S.W.3d 569-70 (Tex. 2002) (mutual promises to arbitrate; consideration)
Fogal v. Stature Construction, Inc., 294 S.W.3d 708 (Tex.App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2009) (misnomer may not defeat enforceability of arbitration)
In re 24R, Inc., 324 S.W.3d 564 (Tex. 2010) (illusory promises; mutuality and consideration)