In Builders First Source-South Texas, LP v. Ortiz, the Fourteenth Court of Appeals held, in an interlocutory appeal, that the trial court had jurisdiction to set aside an arbitrator’s sanctions orders on the basis of evident partiality. The trial court also had jurisdiction to require arbitration before a new arbitrator, but the parties had to go through the AAA process for the appointment. The trial court erred to stay the proceedings pending completion of arbitration.

According to the court’s opinion, Ortiz allegedly suffered workplace injuries. An arbitration provision was contained in his employment agreement with Builders First. The AAA appointed an arbitrator who submitted a sworn disclosure to the effect that none of the parties, lawfirms, or party representatives appeared before her in past arbitrations. The disclosure confirmed that the arbitrator checked for conflicts. About a year later, the parties conducted a telephone hearing with the arbitrator. The arbitrator and counsel for Builders First discussed two previous cases where the counsel appeared before the arbitrator. Ortiz joined the call and, according to the court, the Builders First counsel and the arbitrator seemed “extremely friendly and appeared to joke about [the arbitrator’s] favorable decisions for [the counsel] in the past”. After the call, the arbitrator submitted an amended disclosure identifying the cases where she served as arbitrator seven years prior.

Read original article


Tags: