Watts Regulator Co. v. Texas Farmers Insurance Company as Subrogee of Kadrey Semo, 498 S.W.3d 643

Watts Regulator and Texas Farmers were separate signatories to Arbitration Forums, Inc. (AF) by signing AF’s preprinted membership form; AF administers a voluntary arbitration forum for signatory companies.
AF’s form required signatories to submit subrogation claims to AF but allowed any signatory to withdraw with written notice; withdrawal becomes effective 60 days after notice “except as to cases then pending before arbitration panels.”
Farmers sent written notice withdrawing from AF on July 29, 2014 (effective 60 days later). The underlying property-damage incidents occurred April 23, 2013 (Martinez) and May 8, 2013 (Semo); Farmers filed suit against Watts in March/April 2015—after its AF withdrawal took effect.
Watts moved to compel arbitration through AF; trial courts denied the motions. Watts appealed in consolidated interlocutory appeals under Texas appellate rules.
The core dispute: whether claims that accrued while Farmers was a signatory—but that were not pending before an AF arbitration panel at the time Farmers’ withdrawal became effective—are nonetheless subject to compulsory arbitration under the AF agreement.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether AF agreement requires arbitration of subrogation claims that accrued while Farmers was a signatory but were not pending before an arbitration panel when Farmers’ withdrawal became effective	Watts: Any claim that accrued while Farmers was a signatory must be arbitrated through AF	Farmers: Withdrawal became effective 60 days after notice; only "cases then pending before arbitration panels" remained subject to AF; claims not pending then are not bound	Court affirmed denial of arbitration: Farmers’ withdrawal converted it to a nonsignatory as to claims not then pending before AF panels; Watts could not compel arbitration

BBVA Compass Invs. Solutions, Inc. v. Brooks, 456 S.W.3d 711 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2015) (discusses arbitration-survival principles and scope analysis)
Moayedi v. Interstate 35/Chisam Rd., L.P., 438 S.W.3d 1 (Tex. 2014) (unambiguous contracts are construed as a matter of law)
In re Labatt Food Serv., L.P., 279 S.W.3d 640 (Tex. 2009) (de novo review of construction of unambiguous arbitration agreements)
In re Guggenheim Corp. Funding, LLC, 380 S.W.3d 879 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2012) (orig. proceeding) (review standards for arbitration agreement questions)
Aldridge v. Thrift Fin. Mktg., LLC, 376 S.W.3d 877 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2012) (agreement to arbitrate limited to disputes among members under forum rules)
In re Odyssey Healthcare, Inc., 310 S.W.3d 419 (Tex. 2010) (orig. proceeding) (addressing enforceability and limits of arbitration agreements)
In re Halliburton Co., 80 S.W.3d 566 (Tex. 2002) (orig. proceeding) (arbitration agreement termination/amendment does not necessarily render agreement illusory)