DRAFT 2 Brief on the merits - Supreme Court of Texas

TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS................................................................................................................. i
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES .......................................................................................................... ii
JOINDER AND ADOPTION OF PETITION AND BRIEF ON THE MERITS .......................... 1
STATEMENT OF THE CASE....................................................................................................... 1
ISSUES PRESENTED ................................................................................................................... 2
1. When a plaintiff’s claims are compelled to arbitration and the plaintiff does nothing
to initiate arbitration proceedings for more than four years after the trial court orders
arbitration, has there been a default in arbitration under Section 3 of the Federal
Arbitration Act? .................................................................................................................. 2
2. When a plaintiff has defaulted in arbitration, does a trial court violate the Federal
Arbitration Act by granting the defaulting plaintiff’s request to return to arbitration?...... 2
STATEMENT OF FACTS ............................................................................................................. 2
ARGUMENT.................................................................................................................................. 3
A. Heritage Waived Its Right to Arbitrate Because It Unreasonably Delayed in Filing a Demand for
Arbitration After the Trial Court Ordered the Parties to Arbitrate....................................................... 3
1. Heritage’s Inaction Constitutes Default........................................................................................ 4
2. This Question Cannot Be Decided By The Arbitrator When Arbitration was Never Initiated .... 6
3. A Four-Year Delay in Initiating Arbitration is Prejudicial Per Se................................................ 8
4. Heritage Had a Duty to Diligently Pursue Its Claims by Initiating Arbitration Proceedings Within
a Reasonable Time ......................................................................................................................... 10
5. The Purpose of Arbitration is Frustrated By a Four-Year Delay in Initiating Arbitration After
Arbitration Was Compelled ........................................................................................................... 12
B. Brandt was Prejudiced by Heritage's Delay.................................................................................... 13
C. Heritage's Claims Must be Dismissed Because They Were Abandoned ........................................ 15
D. Mandamus is Appropriate Because the Trial Court had a Duty to Require Heritage to Prosecute its
Suit With Diligence......................................................................................................................... 16
Prayer ............................................................................................................................................ 17
Certification .................................................................................................................................. 18
i