Gary Stallworth v. Dowlen Oaks Retirement Center and Emeritus Corporation--Appeal from 136th District Court of Jefferson County
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
In The Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont _________________ NO. 09-09-00395-CV _________________ GARY STALLWORTH, Appellant V. DOWLEN OAKS RETIREMENT CENTER AND EMERITUS CORPORATION, Appellees _____________________________________________________________________ On Appeal from the 136th District Court Jefferson County, Texas Trial Cause No. D-180,722 _____________________________________________________________________ MEMORANDUM OPINION In 2007, Gary Stallworth filed a personal injury suit against his employer, Dowlen Oaks Retirement Center, ( Dowlen Oaks ) and its parent company, Emeritus Corporation ( Emeritus ). The trial court abated the proceedings and referred the case to binding arbitration. In 2009, the arbitrator granted the defendants no-evidence motion for summary judgment and ordered that the case be dismissed with prejudice. The trial court dismissed the case with prejudice, and Stallworth appealed. See TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE ANN. § 171.098(a)(3) (Vernon 2005). Although the case was originally submitted 1 without briefs, we granted leave for late filing and Stallworth subsequently filed a letter brief. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.6(d). The appellees also submitted a letter brief to the Court. In his brief, Stallworth argues that his case should not have been dismissed because he sustained an on-the-job injury but did not receive workers compensation benefits. The record reflects that the trial court entered an order conforming to the order of the arbitrator. See TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE ANN. § 171.092 (a) (Vernon 2005). Stallworth did not present the trial court with grounds to vacate the arbitrator s decision. See generally TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE ANN. § 171.088 (Vernon 2005). Accordingly, the trial court was authorized to confirm the arbitrator s decision. See TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE ANN. § 171.087 (Vernon 2005). We affirm the trial court s final order in this case. AFFIRMED. ________________________________ HOLLIS HORTON Justice Submitted on March 2, 2010 Opinion Delivered April 1, 2010 Before McKeithen, C.J., Kreger and Horton, JJ. 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.
