Southland Log Homes, Inc. d/b/a Southland Log Homes and Southland Log Homes, LLC d/b/a Southland Log Homes and a/k/a Texas Favorite Log Home, LLC v. Betty J. Plant, Individually and as Trustee of the Betty J. Plant Revocable Trust Appeal from 225th Judicial District Court of Bexar County (memorandum opinion per curiam)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas MEMORANDUM OPINION No. 04-19-00520-CV SOUTHLAND LOG HOMES, INC. d/b/a Southland Log Homes and Southland Log Homes, LLC d/b/a Southland Log Homes and a/k/a Texas Favorite Log Home, LLC, Appellants v. Betty J. PLANT, Individually and as Trustee of the Betty J. Plant Revocable Trust, Appellee From the 225th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 2019CI05974 Honorable Cathleen M. Stryker, Judge Presiding PER CURIAM Sitting: Irene Rios, Justice Beth Watkins, Justice Liza A. Rodriguez, Justice Delivered and Filed: October 30, 2019 DISMISSED FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION By order dated September 10, 2019, the appellee was ordered to file a response to the appellants’ request for a stay of the trial court’s order in the underlying cause. On September 20, 2019, the appellee filed a response and a motion to dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. In their notice of appeal, the appellants state they seek to appeal the trial court’s order “to the extent the Order denied Southland’s motion/application to compel the mandatory arbitration of the Plaintiff’s claims against Southland in Richland County, South Carolina.” The appellants 04-19-00520-CV further assert they seek to appeal “the Court’s ruling that the arbitration of the Plaintiff’s claims against Southland must be held in Texas, as opposed to Richland County, South Carolina.” One of the trial court’s orders in the underlying cause grants in part and denies in part the appellants’ motion to stay the underlying cause, staying the underlying cause pending arbitration in Texas. The second order entered by the trial court grants plaintiff’s motion to compel arbitration and orders arbitration to occur in Texas. As noted in the appellee’s response, appellate courts do not have jurisdiction to consider an interlocutory appeal of an order granting a motion to compel “albeit not in the ‘first-choice’ forum.” Al Rushaid v. Nat’l Oilwell Varco, Inc., 814 F.3d 300, 304 (5th Cir. 2016) (citing Bushley v. Credit Suisse First Boston, 360 F.3d 1149, 1153 (9th Cir. 2004), and Augustea Impb Et Salvataggi v. Mitsubishi Corp., 126 F.3d 95, 99 (2d Cir. 1997)). By order dated September 24, 2019, the appellants were ordered to respond to the appellee’s motion to dismiss and show cause in writing by October 9, 2019, why this appeal should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. Appellants did not respond to this court’s order. Because this court does not have jurisdiction to consider an interlocutory appeal of an order granting a motion to compel “albeit not in the ‘first-choice’ forum,” this appeal is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. Id. PER CURIAM -2-
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
