Bradt v. MBNA America, N.A. (Tex. App. – Houston [14th Dist.] Mar. 12, 2009)(per curiam dimissal)
(trial court order compelling arbitration not appealable)
DISMISSED: Per Curiam  
Before Justice Brock Yates, Justice Guzman and Justice Sullivan
14-08-01172-CV L.T. Bradt and Joseph Rothstein v. MBNA America, N.A.
Appeal from 240th District Court of Fort Bend County
Trial Court Judge: THOMAS RALPH CULVER  

M E M O R A N D U M   O P I N I O N

This is an attempted appeal from an order, signed November 5, 2008, compelling arbitration.  We
dismiss this appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

By statute, a party may appeal an order denying arbitration under the Texas Arbitration Act, but
the statute does not provide for an appeal of an order compelling arbitration.  See Tex. Civ. Prac.
& Rem. Code Ann.  §171.098(a) (Vernon 2005).  An interlocutory order compelling arbitration
under the Federal Arbitration Act is also not appealable.  See
In re Poly-America, L.P., 262 S.W.
3d 337, 345 (Tex. 2008)(citing to 9 U.S.C. § 16(b)(1)).  Thus, whether the arbitration provision in
this case implicates the Texas or Federal Arbitration Act, the order signed November 5, 2008, is
not appealable.  See Gathe v. Cigna Healthplan of Texas, Inc., 879 S.W.2d 360, 362 (Tex. App.-
Houston [14th Dist.] 1994, writ denied).

On January 21, 2009, notification was transmitted to the parties of this court's intention to dismiss
the appeal for want of jurisdiction unless appellants filed a response demonstrating grounds for
continuing the appeal on or before February 2, 2009.  See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a).

Appellants filed no response.

Accordingly, the appeal is ordered dismissed.

PER CURIAM


Panel consists of Justices Yates, Guzman, and Sullivan.


ALSO SEE: Other appellate decisions in disputes over arbitration from the Houston Courts of Appeals