In Re Kristofer and Amanda Schroder v. the State of Texas

• Court: Court of Appeals of Texas
• Decided: November 6, 2025
• Docket: 01-25-00880-CV
• Status: Published

Opinion

Opinion issued November 6, 2025

In The

Court of Appeals For The

First District of Texas ———————————— NO. 01-25-00880-CV ——————————— IN RE KRISTOFER AND AMANDA SCHRODER, Relators

Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Relators, Kristopher and Amanda Schroder, have filed a petition writ of

mandamus challenging the trial court’s order compelling arbitration.1 To be entitled

to mandamus, a relator must show both that (1) the trial court clearly abused its

discretion and (2) relator has no adequate remedy by appeal. In re Gulf Expl., LLC,

1 The underlying case is Kristofer Schroder and Amanda Schroder v. Fox Residential Services Group LLC, and FIG Services LLC, cause number 2024-48075, pending in the 152nd District Court of Harris County, Texas, the Honorable Takasha L. Francis presiding. 289 S.W.3d 836, 842 (Tex. 2009). Without deciding whether the trial court abused

its discretion in compelling arbitration, we deny Relators’ mandamus petition

because Relators have not established that they have no adequate remedy by

appeal. See In re Ayad, 655 S.W.3d 285, 290 (Tex. 2022), corrected (Dec. 16, 2022)

(“We have long held that an adequate remedy for a trial court’s error in compelling

the parties to arbitrate is available through an eventual appeal from a final judgment

enforcing an arbitration award.”) (citing In re Gulf Expl., 289 S.W.3d at 838, 842;

In re Palacios, 221 S.W.3d 564, 565 (Tex. 2006)); In re Vantage Drilling Int’l, 555

S.W.3d 629, 633-40 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2018, orig. proceeding [mand.

denied]); In re McAnally, No. 01-18-00831-CV, 2018 WL 4780809, at *1 (Tex.

App.—Houston [1st Dist.] Oct. 4, 2018, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.).

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Guerra, Guiney, and Johnson.