Opinion
No. 02-20-00315-CV
11-06-2020
IN RE GENERAL DATATECH, LP, Relator
Original Proceeding 17th District Court of Tarrant County, Texas
Trial Court No. 017-310938-19 Before Gabriel, Bassel, and Wallach, JJ.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
I. INTRODUCTION
Relator General Datatech, LP (GDT) seeks mandamus relief from the trial court's September 18, 2020 order denying its motion to quash and for a protective order. Because an arbitration issue in the underlying suit remains unresolved, we conditionally grant GDT's petition.
II. BACKGROUND
Procedurally, the following occurred:
• Mushkin, Inc., d/b/a Enhanced Network Systems (ENS), sued Comp-E-Ware Technology Associates, Inc., d/b/a Comware.
• Comware filed a motion to compel arbitration that the trial court denied.
• Comware filed an interlocutory appeal contesting the trial court's denial of its motion to compel arbitration. See Comp-E-Ware Tech. Assocs., Inc., v. Mushkin, Inc., No. 02-20-00185-CV. Comware's interlocutory appeal remains pending.
• While Comware's interlocutory appeal was pending, ENS served GDT, a nonparty, with a subpoena duces tecum.
• GDT filed a motion to quash and for a protective order.
• ENS filed a motion to compel.
• The trial court denied GDT's motion and granted ENS's.
• GDT filed this petition for writ of mandamus and a motion for temporary relief, and on October 16, 2020, we granted GDT's motion and stayed the trial court's September 18, 2020 order.
III. STANDARD OF REVIEW
Mandamus relief is proper only to correct a clear abuse of discretion when there is no "adequate remedy at law, such as a normal appeal." In re H.E.B. Grocery Co., L.P., 492 S.W.3d 300, 304 (Tex. 2016) (orig. proceeding) (quoting State v. Walker, 679 S.W.2d 484, 485 (Tex. 1984) (orig. proceeding)); In re SSCP Mgmt., Inc., 573 S.W.3d 464, 469 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2019, orig. proceeding). A party lacks an adequate remedy on appeal when the benefits of mandamus outweigh its detriments. In re Prudential Ins. Co. of Am., 148 S.W.3d 124, 136 (Tex. 2004) (orig. proceeding); In re SSCP Mgmt., Inc., 573 S.W.3d at 469. A clear failure by the trial court to analyze or apply the law correctly constitutes an abuse of discretion. Walker v. Packer, 827 S.W.2d 833, 840 (Tex. 1992) (orig. proceeding); In re SSCP Mgmt., Inc., 573 S.W.3d at 469.
IV. DISCUSSION
Among other arguments, GDT asserts that while Comware's interlocutory appeal contesting the denial of its motion to compel arbitration is pending, merits-based discovery in the trial court is not authorized. We agree. See In re Houston Pipe Line Co., 311 S.W.3d 449, 451 (Tex. 2009) (orig. proceeding) (per curiam). The trial court has no discretion to compel discovery before the arbitration issue has been resolved. See In re Champion Techs., Inc., 173 S.W.3d 595, 599 (Tex. App.—Eastland 2005, orig. proceeding) (op. on reh'g). Although the trial court ruled against Comware's motion to compel arbitration, Comware appealed that ruling, and Comware's appeal remains pending before us.
GDT is not a party to the underlying suit, so it could not appeal. Mandamus is the only way it could seek relief. In re Arras, 24 S.W.3d 862, 864 (Tex. App.—El Paso 2000, orig. proceeding).
Accordingly, mandamus is proper.
V. CONCLUSION
We conditionally grant GDT's petition. We order the trial court to vacate that portion of its September 18, 2020 order denying GDT's motion for protective order and granting ENS's motion to compel to the extent it impacts GDT. Our October 16, 2020 order issued in this original proceeding that stays the trial court's September 18, 2020 order to the extent it impacts GDT will be automatically lifted when the trial court complies with this order.
In Comware's interlocutory appeal, we are today staying the trial court's September 18, 2020 order as it pertains to Comware until final resolution of its interlocutory appeal.
We express no opinion on any of GDT's other arguments pertaining to whether discovery would be proper after resolution of Comware's interlocutory appeal.
We are confident that the trial court will act in accordance with this opinion. The writ will issue only if the trial court fails to do so.
/s/ Lee Gabriel
Lee Gabriel
Justice Delivered: November 6, 2020