On Friday, the Third Court of Appeals handed down an opinion on a petition for writ of mandamus holding that a Burnet County judge abused his discretion in failing to compel arbitration of a breach of contract claim brought by a partner and his wife against a partnership. The Court held that, under Federal Arbitration Act analysis, Texas law governs questions of whether a valid arbitration clause exists and whether the claims asserted fall within its scope, but the scope of an arbitration clause is defined by federal law. In this case, the Court found both that the clause in question was broad enough to cover the asserted claims and that the partner’s wife, a non-signatory, was also bound by the arbitration clause. Technorati Tags: arbitration, litigation, Third Court of Appeals, law

Yesterday, the Fifth Ciruit Court of Appeals handed down an opinion affirming a decision from the Northern District of Texas to vacate an arbitral award where the single arbitrator failed to disclose that he had worked with one of the attorneys in the case on a large piece of patent litigation in the 1990s. The arbitrator and the attorney in question were two of thirty-four lawyers representing Intel in the prior case over the course of several years, and they never met or spoke prior to the arbitration, but the district court found that the arbitrator still had an obligation to disclose the prior relationship, and the failure to disclose required that the District Court vacate the award. The Fifth Circuit agreed. The opinion (download .pdf version of opinion here), written by Justice Reavley, explains in detail the history of Fifth Circuit Jurisprudence on the question of arbitrator disclosure of potential conflicts, and confirms that the rule in the Circuit is “when in doubt, at all, disclose.” Positive Software v. New Century Mortgage Corp., et al. Cause No. 04-11432 (designated for publication).

On Wednesday, The Third Court of Appeals issued an opinion overturning a trial court summary judgment and rendering judgment in a case which involved the calculation of royalty fees under an oil and gas lease. Cause No. 03-04-00820-CV, Tana Oil & Gas Corp. v. Cernosek, et al.

Yesterday, the Third Court of Appeals handed down two memorandum opinions. The first discussed a deferred ajudication of a truancy charge. Cause No. 03-03-00253-CV, Jim Walden v. Rex Baker, Justice of the Peace, Precinct 4, Hays County Yesterday’s other memorandum opinion affirms a trial court judgment dismissing a declaratory judgment action which sought to invalidate Austin’s new smoking ordinance. The VFW, which operates bingo halls in which smoking is commonplace, argued that Austin’s smoking ban improperly criminalized behavior, smoking, which is legal in Texas. The Court of Appeals held that the trial court rightly dismissed the VFW’s claim “because a civil court does not have jurisdiction to make the naked declarations requested by appellants.” Cause No. 03-03-00762-CV, Veterans of Foreign Wars v. City of Austin