|
A Texas Appellate Court held that no evidentiary hearing was necessary to grant motion to compel arbitration.
In In re Jim Walter Homes, Inc., No. 14-06-00635-CV, 14-06-00792-CV, 2006 WL 3228602 (Tex. App.-Hous. 14 Dist. Nov 07, 2006), Sarah Cryer and Mildred Wooten contracted with Jim Walter Homes, Inc (“Jim Walter”) to build a home. The contract contained an arbitration agreement.
Cryer and Wooten filed suit for breach of contract and personal injury claims. Jim Walter moved to compel arbitration. Without hearing evidence, the trial court held that all but the personal injury claims were arbitrable under the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA).
Jim Walter sought a writ of mandamus to order the trial court judge to vacate the part of the order that denied arbitration. Cryer and Wooten also sought a writ of mandamus, but to vacate the part of the order which compelled arbitration. The Court found that it had no jurisdiction to review an order to compel arbitration and dismissed Cryer and Wooten’s claim.
The Court disagreed with all of Cryer and Wooten’s arguments regarding the denial of arbitration on personal injury claims. It held that Jim Walter had not waived its right to arbitrate by failure to respond to requests for arbitration. Jim Walter’s subsequent behavior was not inconsistent with the intent to arbitrate.
The Court further held that no evidentiary hearing was necessary to grant the motion to compel arbitration. Jim Walter provided the necessary documentation to prove that a valid arbitration agreement existed between the parties. Further, the Court disagreed that personal injury claims were not arbitrable under the Texas Arbitration Act (TAA). This arbitration agreement was governed by the FAA. Under the FAA, all of the claims fell within the broad scope of the agreement. Thus, the Court granted the writ of mandamus filed by Jim Walter.
Subscribe to a free weekly update on ADR case law and
legislation
|