COMMENT: Although Chief Justice Jefferson, in his 2007 State of the Judiciary Address to the Legislature
expressed concern about the increasing resort to arbitration as a largely unreviewable form of dispute
resolution compared to litigation and trial on the merits, the Supreme Court has been quite willing to use its
mandamus power to order or enforce arbitration.

City of Rockwall, Texas v. Hughes, No. 05-0126 (Tex. Jan 25, 2008) (Johnson) (annexation, arbitration)

No Waiver of Right to Compel Arbitration

In re Bank One, No. 06-0093 (Tex. Feb. 23, 2007)(per curiam)
(arbitration case law, presumption against waiver of right to arbitrate)

Court Enforced Lopsided Arbitration Agreement

In Re Palm Harbor Homes, No. 04-0490 (Tex. Jun. 9, 2006)(mandamus)(Justice Johnson)
[arbitration law, motion to compel arbitration, arbitration clause, binding, nonbinding, unconscionable]
This original proceeding presents the issue of whether the purchasers of a manufactured home must
arbitrate their claims against both the retailer and manufacturer of the home pursuant to a written
arbitration agreement between the purchasers and the retailer. The agreement specified that it inured to
the benefit of the manufacturer and gave the manufacturer a twenty-day period during which it could opt
out of arbitration. We conclude that the manufacturer’s opt-out right did not render the arbitration
agreement unenforceable and that the purchasers must arbitrate their claims against both parties.
Conclusion. . . .
We conclude that the trial court abused its discretion in failing to order the Ripples to arbitrate their claims
against the retailer and manufacturer. We conditionally grant the writ of mandamus and direct the trial court
to compel arbitration of the Ripples’ claims. The writ will issue only if the trial court fails to comply with our
directive.
In Re Palm Harbor Homes, No. 04-0490 (Tex. Jun. 9, 2006)(mandamus)(Dissent by O'Neill)


Arbitration Clauses - Supreme Court Grants Mandamus to Enforce Employer's
Arbitration Policy in Wrongful Termination Case

In Re Dillard Department Stores, Inc. No. 04-1132(Tex. March 3, 2006)(per curiam)
From El Paso County; 8th district (08 -04 -00262 -CV, ___ S.W.3d ___, 11-24-04). Pursuant to Texas Rule
of Appellate Procedure 52.8(c), without hearing oral argument, the Court conditionally grants the petition
for writ of mandamus. Per Curiam Opinion

In this original proceeding, relator Dillard Department Stores, Inc. seeks to compel arbitration of a
retaliatory discharge claim filed by its former employee. The trial court denied Dillard’s motion to compel,
and the court of appeals rejected Dillard’s petition for writ of mandamus. 153 S.W.3d 145. Because the trial
court clearly abused its discretion in denying the motion to compel arbitration, we conditionally grant Dillard’
s petition for writ of mandamus.

Delia Garcia worked as a sales associate at Dillard’s Sunland Park store in El Paso. In August 2000, Dillard
adopted an arbitration policy covering most employment disputes, including retaliatory discharge. In 2002,
Garcia was fired six months after requesting workers’ compensation benefits for work-related injuries.
Garcia filed the underlying suit for retaliatory discharge, and Dillard moved to compel arbitration. In
response, Garcia alleged that she never agreed to the arbitration policy, and even if she had, the
agreement would be unenforceable because Dillard retained the right to modify the policy at any time,
rendering its promise to arbitrate illusory.

The trial court clearly abused its discretion in denying Dillard’’s motion to compel arbitration. Accordingly,
without hearing oral argument, we conditionally grant the writ of mandamus and order the trial court to
vacate its order denying Dillard’’s motion to compel arbitration, and to enter a new order compelling
arbitration of Garcia’’s claims. Tex. R. App. P. 52.8(c)

ARBITRATION CASE LAW FROM THE COURTS OF APPEALS  

Werline v. East Texas Salt Water Disposal Co., Inc., No. 06-06-00039-CV (Tex.App.- Texarkana Dec. 18,
2006, pet. filed 3/13/2007 and docketed under cause no. 07-0135 )(Opinion by Justice Ross)(employment)

In Re: The Shredder Company, LLC, No. 08-06-00179-CV (Tex.App. - El Paso Nov. 9, 2006)(Opinion by
Justice David Wellington Chew)(mandamus granted to compel arbitration)
Texas Arbitration Case Law (Tex. 2006-08)
Also see --> Texas ADR Blog
Houston Opinions Home Page

LINKS TO  PAGES WITH
INFORMATION ON TEXAS
SUPREME COURT CASES
AND OPINIONS

Texas Supreme Court Blog
Don Cruse's SCOTXBlog
Jefferson Court Blog
Texas Supreme Court e-Briefs  
2006 Supreme Court Opinions
2006 Unsigned Per Curiam Opinion
2007 Supreme Court Opinions
2007 Per Curiam Opinions
2008 Tex. Sup. Ct. Court Opinions

Texas Arbitration Case Law

LINKS TO OPINIONS BY
OTHER JUSTICES OF THE
TEXAS SUPREME COURT

Chief Justice Wallace B. Jefferson
Justice Nathan L. Hecht
Justice Harriet O'Neill
Justice Dale Wainwright
Justice Scott A. Brister
Justice David Medina
Justice Paul W. Green
Justice Phil Johnson
Justice Don R. Willett

Also see opinions from
Texas Courts of Appeals
Austin Texas Cases
Houston Texas Cases
Houston Opinions Home Page