Sherry Parker v. United-Bilt Homes, LLC, 12-17-00054-CV

In 2010 Sherry and William Parker contracted with United-Bilt to build a home; the contract included an arbitration clause. The Parkers stopped payments in December 2011.
United-Bilt sought foreclosure and initiated arbitration; an arbitrator awarded United-Bilt $125,310.29 plus interest, fees, costs, and permitted foreclosure after 30 days.
The federal district court confirmed the arbitration award; William appealed to the Fifth Circuit.
United-Bilt and the Parkers later executed a post-award settlement reducing the payoff to $125,000 to be paid within 44 days, but the Parkers did not perform.
United-Bilt scheduled a new foreclosure; Sherry sued in state court seeking injunctive and declaratory relief while United-Bilt counterclaimed to confirm the arbitration award. The trial court confirmed the arbitration award and denied Sherry’s relief.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the post-arbitration settlement was a valid contract that superseded the arbitration award	Parker: she was not a proper party, lacked capacity, and signed under undue influence, so settlement should control	United-Bilt: settlement was not performed by Parkers; arbitration award remains enforceable and must be confirmed absent grounds for vacatur	Court: Written judgment confirmed arbitration award; Parkers breached settlement, so it cannot supersede the award; confirmed arbitration award
Whether Sherry was a party to the arbitration such that she is bound by the award	Parker: asserted she was not made a party to the arbitration	United-Bilt: arbitration documents list Sherry; her counsel participated and submitted materials	Court: Sherry was a party and participated in arbitration; res judicata applies to issues litigated there
Whether the arbitration award should be vacated	Parker: did not assert statutory grounds for vacatur in trial or on appeal	United-Bilt: award should be confirmed because no vacatur grounds shown	Court: No FAA/TAA vacatur grounds were argued or proven; confirmation mandatory
Whether prior arbitration rulings (e.g., capacity) are relitigable	Parker: sought to challenge capacity post-arbitration	United-Bilt: capacity was litigated in arbitration and denied by arbitrator	Court: Arbitrator addressed capacity; res judicata bars relitigation

Seasha Pools, Inc. v. Hardister, 391 S.W.3d 635 (Tex. App.—Austin 2012) (written judgment controls over oral trial pronouncements)
Amoco D.T. Co. v. Occidental Petroleum Corp., 343 S.W.3d 837 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2011) (review of arbitration awards is narrowly confined)
Hall St. Assocs., L.L.C. v. Mattel, Inc., 552 U.S. 576 (U.S. 2008) (statutory grounds for vacatur under the FAA are limited)
Hoskins v. Hoskins, 497 S.W.3d 490 (Tex. 2016) (TAA vacatur standards and requirements)
Zanchi v. Lane, 349 S.W.3d 97 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 2011) (definition of a party to an action and who is bound)
CVN Group, Inc. v. Delgado, 95 S.W.3d 234 (Tex. 2002) (arbitral awards given effect of judgments of a court of last resort)
John G. & Marie Stella Kenedy Mem. Found. v. Dewhurst, 90 S.W.3d 268 (Tex. 2002) (res judicata bars relitigation of issues that were or could have been raised)
Mustang Pipeline Co., Inc. v. Driver Pipeline Co., Inc., 134 S.W.3d 195 (Tex. 2004) (material breach excuses nonbreaching party from further performance)
Ramex Constr. Co. v. Tamcon Servs. Inc., 29 S.W.3d 135 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2000) (a defaulting party generally cannot enforce the contract)
Joseph v. PPG Indus., Inc., 674 S.W.2d 862 (Tex. App.—Austin 1984) (one who breaches a contract cannot recover on it)
Hogan v. J. Higgins Trucking, Inc., 197 S.W.3d 879 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2006) (a ruling may be implicit where it can be understood from the record)