Mission Petroleum Carriers, Inc. v. Linda Garcia

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedFebruary 24, 2005
Docket13-04-00572-CV
StatusPublished

This text of Mission Petroleum Carriers, Inc. v. Linda Garcia (Mission Petroleum Carriers, Inc. v. Linda Garcia) 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.

Bluebook
Mission Petroleum Carriers, Inc. v. Linda Garcia, (Tex. Ct. App. 2005).

Opinion




                                NUMBER 13-04–572-CV


COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS


CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG




MISSION PETROLEUM CARRIERS, INC.,                             Appellant,


v.

LINDA GARCIA,                                                              Appellees.





On appeal from the 138th District Court

of Cameron County, Texas.





MEMORANDUM OPINION


Before Justices Yañez, Castillo and Garza

Per Curiam Memorandum Opinion


Interlocutory appeal is appropriate to review an order denying arbitration under the Texas Arbitration Act (TAA). See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. §§171.021, 171.098(a)(1) (Vernon Supp. 2004-2005). Mandamus is appropriate to review an order denying arbitration when the Federal Arbitration Act applies. In re Valero, 968 S.W.2d at 916 (citing Jack B. Anglin Co. v. Tipps, 842 S.W.2d 255, 272 (Tex. 1992) (orig. proceeding)); In re MONY Secs. Corp. v. Durham, 83 S.W.3d 279, 282 (Tex. App.–Corpus Christi 2002, combined appeal and orig. proceeding).

 The instant case involves an Employee Health and Safety Plan (“Plan”) which calls for arbitration of any disputes involving an occupational injury and related issues. Under the Plan, all arbitration procedures are to be governed by the Federal Arbitration Act. Appellee signed an Arbitration Agreement agreeing to that arbitration.

In its opinion which issued February 11, 2005, this Court conditionally granted the writ of mandamus requested by these same parties in Cause No. 13-04-00550-CV. That opinion reflects that the arbitration provisions in issue evidence the intent to proceed under the Federal Arbitration Act, and further that the claims in issue fall within the scope of the arbitration agreement. Mandamus is therefore the appropriate vehicle for relief. See In re MONY, 83 S.W.3d at 282-83. We refer the parties to the opinion issued February 11, 2005, conditionally granting the writ of mandamus, and DISMISS this interlocutory appeal in cause number 13-04-641-CV for want of jurisdiction. See id. at 283.

                                                      PER CURIAM

Memorandum Opinion delivered and filed

this 24th day of February, 2005.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Mony Securities Corp. v. Durham
83 S.W.3d 279 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2002)
Biogen Distributors, Inc. v. Tanner
842 S.W.2d 253 (Court of Appeals of Tennessee, 1992)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Mission Petroleum Carriers, Inc. v. Linda Garcia, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mission-petroleum-carriers-inc-v-linda-garcia-texapp-2005.