Opinion
01-24-00419-CV
08-06-2024
Trill Burgers LLC, Trill Burgers 3607 LLC, Trill Tenders LLC, Bernard Freeman, Andy Nguyen, and Nicolas Scurfield v. Benson Vivares and Patsy Vivares
189th District Court of Harris County Trial court case number: 2023-56337
ORDER
April Farris Judge's
Appellants Bernard Freeman, Andy Nguyen, and Nicolas Scurfield, have appealed the trial court's June 25, 2024 order denying the "Motion to Compel Arbitration and Stay Proceedings" filed by appellant Trill Burgers LLC and appellants Bernard Freeman and Andy Nguyen, and joined by appellant Nicolas Scurfield.
On June 27, 2024, appellants Freeman, Nguyen, and Scurfield filed a "Motion for Temporary Order," requesting that this Court issue an order staying trial court proceedings "pending a resolution of this interlocutory appeal of the trial court's June 25, 2024 order" denying their motions to compel arbitration. See Tex. R. App. P. 29.3. In the motion, appellants state that the issues disputed in the underlying litigation are subject to a binding arbitration clause included in the Trill Burgers LLC operating agreement. Appellants argued that the stay was necessary to protect the parties' rights under the operating agreement and to prevent the trial court from interfering with those rights by considering the motion for summary judgment of appellees Benson Vivares and Patsy Vivares, currently set for submission on the trial court's August 26, 2024 docket.
On July 11, 2024, appellees filed a response in opposition to appellants motion for temporary order. In their response, appellees argued that the trial court "correctly denied" appellants' motions to compel arbitration. Appellees argued, among other things, that "an interlocutory appeal of a motion to compel arbitration does not automatically stay the trial court proceedings." And further that the record does not include "a signed and authenticated operating agreement" containing the arbitration clause appellants seek to enforce. For those reasons, among others, appellees argued that appellants failed to establish that a stay of the underlying trial court proceedings was necessary.
Appellants' motion for temporary order is denied.
It is so ORDERED.