Llano Logistics, Inc. v. Ulysses Carmona, 07-21-00254-CV

Plaintiff Ulysses Carmona, a truck driver for Llano Logistics, was struck by a co-worker’s spotter truck during a delivery and sued Llano for negligence and premises liability.
Carmona signed Llano’s Texas Workplace Benefit Plan, which includes a Dispute Resolution Program and Agreement (DRPA) requiring arbitration for certain work-related disputes.
Llano initially answered without moving to compel arbitration, paid Carmona benefits under the Plan, and the parties proceeded under agreed scheduling orders and discovery for about a year.
Llano filed a motion to compel arbitration on April 12, 2021; the trial court denied the motion on October 7, 2021, and Llano filed an interlocutory appeal.
The principal disputed legal issues on appeal were (1) whether a valid arbitration agreement existed and covered Carmona’s claims and (2) whether Llano waived the right to arbitrate (expressly or impliedly) by participating in litigation and agreeing to scheduling orders.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Existence of a valid arbitration agreement	Carmona argued Llano’s promise was illusory (no consideration)	Llano pointed to the signed DRPA and the presumption that a signed written contract has consideration	Agreement found valid; Carmona failed to preserve illusory-consideration argument for appeal
Whether scheduling orders/Rule 11 agreements amounted to express waiver	Carmona: by agreeing to trial dates and scheduling orders Llano contractually waived arbitration	Llano: agreeing to scheduling orders does not repudiate arbitration right	No express waiver; agreeing to a scheduling order does not constitute repudiation
Whether Llano impliedly waived arbitration by litigation conduct (delay/discovery)	Carmona: Llano substantially invoked the judicial process, causing prejudice (delay, discovery, knowledge of trial strategy and damages)	Llano: delay and routine discovery do not amount to substantial invocation; discovery is usable in arbitration; no demonstrable prejudice	No implied waiver: totality of circumstances does not show substantial invocation plus prejudice
Remedy / Result	Carmona sought to proceed to trial in court	Llano sought to compel arbitration	Court reversed trial court’s denial and remanded with instructions to enforce arbitration provision

Perry Homes v. Cull, 258 S.W.3d 580 (Tex. 2008) (arbitration rights may be waived expressly or impliedly; arbitration favored)
G.T. Leach Builders, LLC v. Sapphire V.P., L.P., 458 S.W.3d 502 (Tex. 2015) (entry of scheduling order does not waive arbitration)
RSL Funding, LLC v. Pippins, 499 S.W.3d 423 (Tex. 2016) (high burden to prove implied waiver; delay alone is insufficient)
In re AdvancePCS Health L.P., 172 S.W.3d 603 (Tex. 2005) (mutual promises to arbitrate supply consideration for arbitration agreements)
In re 24R, Inc., 324 S.W.3d 564 (Tex. 2010) (illusory promises negate mutuality of obligation)
In re Halliburton Co., 80 S.W.3d 566 (Tex. 2002) (amendment/termination clauses with notice and prospective effect do not render arbitration clause illusory)
Dallas Cardiology Assocs., P.A. v. Mallick, 978 S.W.2d 209 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 1998) (two-step inquiry: existence of agreement and whether claims fall within its scope)
Legoland Discovery Ctr. (Dallas), LLC v. Superior Builders, LLC, 531 S.W.3d 218 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2017) (factors to assess implied waiver)
In re Serv. Corp. Int’l, 85 S.W.3d 171 (Tex. 2002) (delay in seeking arbitration is not dispositive of waiver)