Arbitration – Reverse and Remanded

  • The Sinclair Group, LTD. v. Haggblom
    • 548 S.W.3d 40
    • 284th District Court of Montgomery County
    • Justice Horton, April 12, 2018
  • Sinclair appealed the trial court’s denial of their motion to compel arbitration. The crux of the dispute fell on whether the appraised complied with the appraisal method establish in the parties’ agreements. Haggblom argued that the appraiser’s opinion was final because the appraisal provision in the agreement stated that “determination of the [fair market value] . . . shall be binding upon the parties.” Sinclair, on the other hand, argued that the term “binding” did not overrule an arbitrable dispute.
  • The Ninth Court found that the parties’ agreements required the parties to arbitrate “[a]ny and all disputes, controversies, or claims arising out of or relating” to the agreements; therefore, given the broad scope of the arbitration agreement language, the dispute over the appraisal method was an arbitrable issue. Noting the State’s public policy of strongly favoring arbitration, the Ninth Court held that the trial court erred by denying the motion to compel arbitration, reversed the order, and remanded the case to resolve the dispute through arbitration.