Merfish Holdings, Ltd., Jacobson Holdings, Ltd., and RMG Properties v. VisteelI., Ltd. Tex-Tube Co. & TT Investment Co.
This text of Merfish Holdings, Ltd., Jacobson Holdings, Ltd., and RMG Properties v. VisteelI., Ltd. Tex-Tube Co. & TT Investment Co. (Merfish Holdings, Ltd., Jacobson Holdings, Ltd., and RMG Properties v. VisteelI., Ltd. Tex-Tube Co. & TT Investment Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Opinion issued May 9, 2002
In The
Court of Appeals
For The
First District of Texas
NO. 01-02-00062-CV
____________
MERFISH HOLDINGS, LTD., JACOBSON HOLDINGS, LTD.,
AND RMG PROPERTIES, INC., Appellants
V.
VISTEEL I, LTD., TEX-TUBE COMPANY,
AND TT INVESTMENT COMPANY, Appellees
On Appeal from the 113th District Court
Harris County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. 2001-56968
O P I N I O N
In this accelerated case, appellants, Merfish Holdings, Ltd., Jacobson Holdings, Ltd., and RMG Properties, Inc. (collectively "the Merfish Group"), challenge the trial court's December 17, 2001 order denying their motion to stay the proceeding and compel arbitration between them and appellees, ViSteel I, Ltd., Tex-Tube Company, and TT Investment Company (collectively "the ViSteel Group").
The arbitration clauses at issue are contained in two joint venture agreements entered into in 1994. All parties agree that the business of the joint ventures involved interstate commerce. The Federal Arbitration Act applies to all suits in state and federal court when the dispute concerns a "contract evidencing a transaction involving commerce." Jack B. Anglin Co. v. Tipps, 842 S.W.2d 266, 269-70 (Tex. 1992) (orig. proceeding).
Mandamus, not interlocutory appeal, is the proper means for reviewing an order denying arbitration under the Federal Arbitration Act. Cantella & Co., Inc. v. Goodwin, 924 S.W.2d 943, 945 (Tex. 1996) (orig. proceeding); Anglin, 842 S.W.2d at 272. Thus, we have no jurisdiction to consider this interlocutory appeal, and we must dismiss it for want of jurisdiction. See Belmont Constructors, Inc. v. Lyondell Petrochemical Co., 896 S.W.2d 352, 356 (Tex. App.--Houston [1st Dist.] 1995, no writ).
We dismiss the Merfish Group's interlocutory appeal of the trial court's December 17, 2001 order for want of jurisdiction. (1)
Frank C. Price
Justice
Panel consists of Justices Nuchia, Radack, and Price. (2)
Do not publish. Tex. R. App. P. 47.
1. 2.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Merfish Holdings, Ltd., Jacobson Holdings, Ltd., and RMG Properties v. VisteelI., Ltd. Tex-Tube Co. & TT Investment Co., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/merfish-holdings-ltd-jacobson-holdings-ltd-and-rmg-texapp-2002.