Lyndon Southern Insurance Company v. W. Parnell, LLC, 05-19-01524-CV

W. Parnell, LLC purchased a commercial property insurance policy from Lyndon Southern in May 2018.
Parnell’s property sustained hail damage in June 2018 and submitted a claim; Lyndon denied coverage in February 2019.
The policy’s appraisal clause allowed either party to demand appraisal and, if appraisers could not agree, for an umpire to be selected or appointed by a judge.
Parnell demanded appraisal; alleges Lyndon refused to appoint an appraiser and filed an application in district court (stating it was “not a lawsuit”) seeking appointment of an umpire under the policy.
After a hearing, the trial court signed an order appointing an umpire on November 8, 2019.
Lyndon appealed, arguing (1) the umpire-appointment order was a final, appealable order and (2) alternatively, mandamus relief was warranted because the appointment constituted an abuse of discretion.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the trial court’s order appointing an umpire is a final, appealable judgment	Parnell: appointment under the policy is ministerial; court involvement did not convert the appraisal into a lawsuit	Lyndon: the order is final and appealable; if not, mandamus should issue because appointment is an abuse of discretion	Court: lacked jurisdiction—appointment of an umpire in absence of a lawsuit is not a final judgment; appeal dismissed
Whether mandamus relief is available to reverse the umpire appointment	Parnell: not addressed as mandamus petitioner	Lyndon: mandamus necessary to prevent appraisal outside policy scope and to protect coverage/cause determinations	Court: mandamus not considered—Lyndon did not file a mandamus petition, arguments speculative, and record lacked reporter’s record; no relief granted

CMH Homes v. Perez, 340 S.W.3d 444 (Tex. 2011) (appellate jurisdiction generally limited to final judgments)
Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191 (Tex. 2001) (labeling an order "final" does not make it a final judgment)
Walker v. Packer, 827 S.W.2d 833 (Tex. 1992) (standards for mandamus review)
Barnes v. W. Alliance Ins. Co., 844 S.W.2d 264 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 1992) (appointment under policy terms does not necessarily invoke judicial determination)
Fire Ass’n of Philadelphia v. Ballard, 112 S.W.2d 532 (Tex. Civ. App.—Waco 1938) (judge’s selection of umpire characterized as ministerial, not judicial, act)
Application of Roberts Co., 128 S.E.2d 137 (N.C. 1962) (appointment of an umpire by a judge under a policy provision is a ministerial act)
Frink v. Blackstock, 813 S.W.2d 602 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1991) (denial of mandamus when relief requires speculation)