Court of Appeals of Texas, Fourth District, San Antonio
the 111th Judicial District Court, Webb County, Texas Trial
Court No. 2018-CVF-001384-D2 Honorable Monica Z. Notzon,
Sitting: Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice Irene Rios, Justice
Liza A. Rodriguez, Justice
A. RODRIGUEZ, JUSTICE
Del Cid Castillo sued HEB Grocery Company, L.P. asserting a
negligence claim for injuries he sustained. In the same
lawsuit, Juan's wife, Maria Del Rosario Del Cid, asserted
a loss of consortium claim. HEB appeals the trial court's
order denying its motion to stay the litigation of
Maria's loss of consortium claim pending the arbitration
of Juan's negligence claim. We reverse the trial
court's order and remand the cause to the trial court for
the entry of an order staying all proceedings in the
underlying cause pending the outcome of the arbitration of
was injured while attempting to cut tree limbs. Juan and
Maria subsequently sued HEB alleging Juan was injured in the
course and scope of his employment, and his injuries were
proximately caused by the negligence of HEB acting through
its agents, employees, and representatives. Juan sought to
recover damages for his injuries, and Maria sought to recover
damages for loss of consortium.
filed a motion to compel arbitration and to stay all
proceedings. Attached to HEB's motion was an
"Election and Agreement Form" signed by Juan when
he first started his employment with HEB. By signing the
document, Juan agreed to arbitrate all disputes relating to
workplace injuries under the Federal Arbitration Act.
both Juan and Maria filed a response opposing the arbitration
of their claims. At the hearing on HEB's motion, however,
Juan agreed to submit his claim to arbitration, but Maria
continued to oppose the arbitration of her claim, asserting
she was a non-signatory to the agreement.
trial court granted the motion as to Juan's claim but
denied the motion as to Maria's claim. On appeal, HEB
does not challenge the portion of the trial court's order
denying its motion to compel arbitration of Maria's
claim. Instead, HEB only challenges the portion of the trial
court's order denying its motion to stay the litigation
of Maria's claim pending the outcome of the arbitration
of Juan's claim.
brief, Maria asserts this court does not have jurisdiction to
consider HEB's interlocutory appeal of the trial
court's order denying the motion to stay Maria's
claim. Instead, Maria contends HEB was required to challenge
the trial court's ruling by seeking mandamus relief. In
its reply brief, HEB responds this court has jurisdiction to
consider its appeal based on section 51.016 of the Texas
Civil Practice and Remedies Code.
51.016 of the Code provides:
In a matter subject to the Federal Arbitration Act (9 U.S.C.
Section 1 et seq.), a person may take an appeal or writ of
error to the court of appeals from the judgment or
interlocutory order of a district court, county court at law,
or county court under the same circumstances that an appeal
from a federal district court's order or decision would
be permitted by 9 U.S.C. Section 16.
Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. § 51.016. As
previously noted, Juan agreed to arbitration under the
Federal Arbitration Act. Under 9 U.S.C. Section 16 an appeal
may be taken from an order refusing a stay of any action
where an issue therein is referable to arbitration. 9 U.S.C.
§§ 3, 16(a)(1)(A); see also Ruff v. Ruff,
No. 05-13-00317-CV, 2013 WL 2470750, at *1 (Tex. App.- Dallas
June 10, 2013, no pet.) (mem. op.) (noting "title 9,
section 16 authorizes an appeal from an order denying a stay
of the proceedings"); Acad., Ltd. v. Miller,
405 S.W.3d 152, 154 (Tex. App.- Houston [1st Dist.] 2013, no
pet.) (noting FAA allows party to appeal an order refusing to
stay litigation pending arbitration of its subject matter).