NUMBER 13-14-00125-CV
COURT OF APPEALS
THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CORPUS CHRISTI – EDINBURG
IN THE INTEREST OF H.N.O. AND M.H.O., CHILDREN
On appeal from the 24th District Court of Victoria County, Texas.
MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Rodriguez, Garza, and Benavides Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam Appellant, M.J.O., perfected an appeal from an order entered by the 24th District
Court of Victoria County, Texas ruling on the appellant's motion to enforce the parties' mediated settlement agreement. On appeal, appellant complains of the trial court's failure to award him attorney's fees and costs. Subsequent to appellant's notice of appeal, the parties agreed to submit the attorney's fees and costs issue to arbitration, as contemplated by the terms of the mediated settlement agreement. The arbitrator thereafter issued its decision, in which appellant was denied his request for fees and *2 costs. Appellant then filed a motion to abate this appeal because he "is in the process of" filing a motion for the arbitrator to modify and correct its ruling and a motion to vacate the ruling with the "319th Judicial District Court." Appellee responded, urging this Court to deny appellant's motion to abate. Appellee also filed a motion to dismiss the appeal for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction, arguing that the parties' agreement to arbitrate the fees and costs dispute waived appellant's right to seek recourse in the courts. Appellant has indicated by reply letter that he does not oppose appellee's motion to dismiss.
The Court, having considered the documents on file and the parties' motions, is of the opinion that this appeal should be dismissed. Having submitted the issues in this appeal to binding arbitration, appellant has waived his right to recourse in this Court. See In re Burton, McCumber & Cortez, L.L.P., 115 S.W.3d 235, 237 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi 2003, orig. proceeding) ("[W]here a party contractually agrees to arbitrate a dispute, it waives its right to recourse in the courts.") (citing D. Wilson Constr. Co. v. McAllen Ind. Sch. Dist., 848 S.W.2d 226, 231 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi 1992, writ dism'd w.o.j.)). We therefore lack jurisdiction over this dispute at this stage.1 Appellee's motion to dismiss is GRANTED, and the appeal is hereby DISMISSED. All other pending motions are DENIED AS MOOT.
PER CURIAM
Delivered and filed the 17th day of July, 2014.
Footnotes
[1] In her motion to dismiss, appellee correctly notes that appellant is not "without remedy if he believes that the arbitrator erroneously affirmed the 24th Judicial District's denial of his motion for fees and costs. His remedies are precisely what he intends to pursue: asking the arbitrator to modify the ruling, and/or asking a district court to vacate the arbitrator's ruling. And if he remains dissatisfied with a district court's response to the arbitrator's ruling he can appeal to this Court."