stating that while the appellate court has jurisdiction to direct the trial court to exercise its discretion, it is not permitted to tell the trial court how to rule on a pending motion
How later courts described this case
- stating that while the appellate court has jurisdiction to direct the trial court to exercise its discretion, it is not permitted to tell the trial court how to rule on a pending motion
- stating that while appellate court has jurisdiction to direct trial court to exercise its discretion, it is not permitted to tell trial court how to rule on pending motion
- granting mandamus relief for trial court’s failure to rule for more than seven months on motion to compel arbitration
- granting relief for a delay of more than seven months in ruling on a motion to compel arbitration
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
COURT OF APPEALS
EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
EL PASO, TEXAS
§ No. 08-15-00049-CV
IN RE
§ ORIGINAL PROCEEDING
READYONE INDUSTRIES, INC.,
§ ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF
RELATOR.
§ MANDAMUS
OPINION
Relator, ReadyOne Industries, Inc., has filed a petition for writ of mandamus against the
Honorable Angie Juarez Barill, Judge of the 346th District Court of El Paso County, Texas,
asking that we order her to rule on Relator’s Motion to Compel Arbitration.
To be entitled to mandamus relief, a relator must meet two requirements. First, the
relator must show that the trial court clearly abused its discretion. In re Prudential Insurance
Company of America, 148 S.W.3d 124, 135 (Tex. 2004). Second, the relator must demonstrate
that there is no adequate remedy by appeal. Id. at 135-36. Mandamus may issue to compel a
trial court to rule on a motion which has been pending before the court for a reasonable period of
time. See In re Shredder Co., L.L.C., 225 S.W.3d 676, 679 (Tex.App.--El Paso 2006, orig.
proceeding); In re Hearn, 137 S.W.3d 681, 685 (Tex.App.--San Antonio 2004, orig. proceeding);
In re Chavez, 62 S.W.3d 225, 228 (Tex.App.-Amarillo 2001, orig. proceeding). To obtain
mandamus relief for such refusal, a relator must establish: (1) the motion was properly filed and
has been pending for a reasonable time; (2) the relator requested a ruling on the motion; and (3)
the trial court refused to rule. See In re Shredder Co., 225 S.W.3d at 679; In re Hearn, 137
S.W.3d at 685; In re Chavez, 62 S.W.3d at 228.
Relator filed its motion to compel arbitration on July 1, 2014 and Respondent conducted
a hearing on the motion on August 13, 2014. Since the hearing, Relator has asked Respondent to
rule with the most recent requests being made in January of 2015, but Respondent has not ruled
on the motion to compel arbitration. Given that more than seven months has elapsed since the
hearing without a ruling on the motion, we conclude that Relator has established its entitlement
to mandamus relief. See In re Shredder, 225 S.W.3d at 680. While we have jurisdiction to
direct the trial court to exercise its discretion, we are not permitted to tell the trial court how to
rule on the motion to compel arbitration. See id. We therefore express no opinion on any of the
issues raised in the motion to compel arbitration and Rodriguez’s response. The petition for writ
of mandamus is conditionally granted. The writ will issue only if the trial court fails to rule on
the motion to compel arbitration within thirty days.
April 10, 2015
YVONNE T. RODRIGUEZ, Justice
Before McClure, C.J., Rodriguez, J., and Barajas, C.J. (Senior Judge)
Barajas, C.J. (Senior Judge)(Sitting by Assignment)
-2-