Rapid Settlements Ltd. v. Allstate Settlement Corp. (Tex.App.- Houston [14th Dist.] Aug.
27, 2009) (interlocutory order setting aside confirmation of arbitration award in bill of review not appeable)
DISMISSED: Per Curiam
Before Chief Justice Hedges, Justices Brock Yates and Frost
14-08-00394-CV Rapid Settlements LTD v. Allstate Settlement Corporation, Allstate Life Insurance
Company, and Andino Ward Appeal from County Civil Court at Law No 4 of Harris County
RAPID SETTLEMENTS, LTD., Appellant
V.
ALLSTATE SETTLEMENT CORPORATION, ALLSTATE LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, and ANDINO WARD,
Appellees
On Appeal from the County Civil Court at Law No. 4
Harris County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. 884872
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 vacating a judgment that confirmed an arbitration award. In the
underlying case, appellant Rapid and appellee Ward participated in an arbitration proceeding resulting in an
award in favor of Rapid. Rapid filed a petition to confirm the arbitration award, which the trial court granted.
On June 9, 2005, the trial court entered a judgment confirming the arbitration award in trial court cause
number 839254.
Appellees Allstate Settlement Corporation and Allstate Life Insurance Company (jointly referred to as
Allstate) were not parties to the arbitration agreement.
After learning of the judgment confirming the arbitration award, Allstate filed a bill of review contending that it
was a necessary party, had not been served with citation, and received no notice of the arbitration
proceedings. Allstate asked the court to vacate the judgment. On March 28, 2008, the trial court granted
the bill of review and ordered the final judgment in cause number 839254 vacated. Rapid then brought this
appeal.
A bill of review that sets aside a prior judgment but does not dispose of all the issues in the case on the
merits is interlocutory. Kiefer v. Touris, 197 S.W.3d 300, 302 (Tex. 2006). Generally, appeals may be taken
only from final judgments. Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 195 (Tex. 2001). Interlocutory
orders may be appealed only if permitted by statute. Bally Total Fitness Corp. v. Jackson, 53 S.W.3d 352,
352 (Tex. 2001); Jack B. Anglin Co., Inc. v. Tipps, 842 S.W.2d 266, 272 (Tex. 1992) (orig. proceeding).
The Texas General Arbitration Act makes certain orders appealable, including an order “vacating an
[arbitration] award without directing a rehearing.” Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. 171.098(a)(5) (Vernon
2005). In the underlying case, the trial court confirmed the arbitration award. In the bill of review
proceeding, the arbitration award was vacated, but the court's ruling was not based on the provisions in the
Texas General Arbitration Act for vacating such an award. See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. 171.088
(Vernon 2005). Therefore, section 171.098 does not apply to provide for an interlocutory appeal under
these facts. See Rapid Settlements, Ltd. v. Allstate Life Ins. Co., No. 01-08-00381-CV, 2009 WL 1331580
(Tex. App.-Houston [1st Dist.] May 8, 2009, no. pet.) (mem. op.) (dismissing appeal from bill of review
vacating arbitration award as interlocutory).
As in the similar case before our sister court of appeals, when the trial court granted Allstate's bill of review,
it vacated the underlying judgment in Rapid's confirmation proceeding but did not rule on the petition for
confirmation itself.
The arbitration award is undisturbed.
The order does not reflect that it is intended to be a final judgment. See Lehmann, 39 S.W.3d at 205
(holding that an order entered in a proceeding other than a trial on the merits may be considered final if it
clearly and unequivocally states that the trial court intended the order to completely dispose of the entire
case). The order appealed in this case is interlocutory and no statute makes it appealable. See Rapid
Settlements, No. 01-08-00381-CV, 2009 WL 1331580 at *3.
On August 4, 2009, notification was transmitted to the parties of this court's intention to dismiss the appeal
for want of jurisdiction unless appellant filed a response demonstrating grounds for continuing the appeal on
or before August 17, 2009. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a). No response was filed.
Accordingly, the appeal is ordered dismissed.
PER CURIAM
Panel consists of Chief Justice Hedges and Justices Yates and Frost.