From the monthly archives: September, 2016
We are pleased to present below all posts archived in 'September, 2016'. If you still can't find what you are looking for, try using the search box.
The Alternative Dispute Resolution Section is pleased to announce the State Bar of Texas ADR Section Roadshow: Mediation, Arbitration, Ethics, and More at St. Mary's University!
St. Mary's Law School - Room LC105
September 19, 2016
Lunch will be provided. Sponsored by the ADR Section of the State Bar of Texas along with the San Antonio Bar Association's Alternative Dispute Resolution Section. Presented by Co-Chairs: Lionel Schooler and Jerry King, Chair of the San Antonio ADR section. Law students are welcome! Attendees will receive State Bar CLE ethics credit.
Please confirm your attendance by RSVP to Linda McLain. The sooner you RSVP, the better! This will allow us to get an accurate headcount for lunch.
We hope to see you there!
Lionel Schooler, Chair
Alternative Dispute Resolution Section
State Bar of Texas
In T.W. Odom Management Services, Ltd. v. Williford, the Ninth District Court of Appeals reversed the trial court's order denying arbitration and remanded the matter with instruction to enter an order granting the motion to compel arbitration. At issue is whether the trial court or the arbitrator had the power to determine gateway issues, such as the interpretation, applicability, or enforceability of the agreement.
Willford worked for Odom, becoming a participant in a workplace injury benefit plan that provided non-subscriber compensation benefits to employees injured on the job. Williford was injured and collected non-subscriber compensation benefits. Williford also filed a negligence suit for the injuries he allegedly sustained on the job. Williford's employer moved to compel arbitration, pursuant to an agreement as a condition of Williford's employment. Williford objected to the motion to arbitrate because the claims were excluded non-subscriber compensation benefits and not tort claims (that were includ ...
Read the rest of entry »
In NACE International v. Johnson, the Court of Appeals for the First District in Texas reversed the trial court's order denying a motion to compel arbitration, remanding the case for entry of an order compelling arbitration. This case involves a construction dispute where one of the parties allegedly failed to pay the outstanding balance for work performed.
NACE moved to compel arbitration and in response, the argument was made that the arbitration agreement was illusory and, therefore, unenforceable. The arbitration agreement provided that any claims subject to mediation and not resolved by that process is subject to binding arbitration and "if a satisfactory settlement is not reached in the arbitration process, [NACE] retains the right to pursue litigation in a court to resolve any such issue."
The Court of Appeals held that "arbitration agreements that bind parties to only arbitrate certain claims to the exclusion of others are not necessarily illusory" and that "one-sided arbitration agreeme ...
Read the rest of entry »