Readyone Industries, Inc. v. Margarita Simental
2012 Tex. App. LEXIS 10662
| Tex. App. | 2012Background
- ReadyOne sought to compel arbitration in Margarita Simental's on-the-job injury suit under a binding arbitration agreement.
- Simental moved for limited discovery on arbitrability to develop the case and challenge the arbitration agreement's validity.
- The trial court ordered limited discovery on the Franken Amendment's applicability and on fraudulent inducement/no meeting of the minds, expressly deferring ruling on arbitration.
- ReadyOne appealed the order, arguing interlocutory review was available under FAA §16 and Texas §51.016.
- The court dismissed the appeal for want of jurisdiction, holding the order deferring a ruling on arbitration is not an appealable interlocutory order.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Is the order postponing ruling on arbitration appealable under FAA §16 and §51.016? | ReadyOne argues postponement is appealable under §16. | Simental argues there is no appealability since merits ruling was not denied or stayed. | Not appealable; dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. |
Key Cases Cited
- CMH Homes, Inc. v. Perez, 340 S.W.3d 444 (Tex. 2011) (limits interlocutory appealability of certain orders)
- Nazareth Hall Nursing Ctr. v. Castro, 374 S.W.3d 590 (Tex.App.--El Paso 2012) (strictly construes interlocutory appeal rights)
- In re F.C. Holdings, Inc., 349 S.W.3d 811 (Tex.App.--Tyler 2011) (no appeal when trial court defers ruling on a motion to compel arbitration)
- Texas La Fiesta Auto Sales, LLC v. Belk, 349 S.W.3d 872 (Tex.App.--Houston [14th Dist.] 2011) (supports continuity of FAA-related appeal standards)
- Madol v. Dan Nelson Auto. Grp., 372 F.3d 997 (8th Cir. 2004) (some circuits treat related orders as appealable under §16)