Originally published by Gene Roberts.
The Fourteenth District Court of Appeals issued its decision in In re Valerus Compression Services, LP, holding that the trial court abused its discretion when it granted a Rule 202 petition (to investigate potential claims) without ruling on a motion to compel arbitration. In its decision, the Court held that mandamus is the appropriate proceeding to review a trial court’s order deferring ruling on a motion to compel arbitration and a trial court cannot defer its ruling on the issue of arbitrability until a Rule 202 deposition had been taken. The majority opinion cites to In re Bill Heard Chevrolet, acknowledging that the concurring opinion in In re Valerus Compression Services, LP “raises a valid argument as to why this court should consider its decision in In re Bill Heard Chevrolet.” The concurring opinion states that a Rule 202 trial court does not have jurisdiction to rule on a motion to compel arbitration.
Curated by Texas Bar Today. Follow us on Twitter @texasbartoday.
from Texas Bar Today http://ift.tt/1Q0OwZu
via Abogado Aly Website
No comments:
Post a Comment