AUSTIN - On Friday, the Texas Supreme Court reversed a judgment denying a strip club’s motion to compel arbitration in a wrongful death lawsuit.
The lawsuit was brought by the family of the late Stephanie Sotero Hernandez and named Baby Dolls Saloons as one of the defendants.
Court records state Hernandez was tragically killed in a high-speed crash while riding in a car driven by Mayra Naomi Salazar in the early morning hours shortly after the two adult entertainers had left work at Baby Dolls.
Hernandez’s family alleges the club continued serving Salazar alcohol after knowing she was clearly intoxicated.
In response to the suit, the club moved to compel arbitration, asserting Hernandez had signed a contract, which contained a broad arbitration provision.
The trial court denied the motion and the decision was affirmed on appeal, court records show.
Hernandez’s family had argued that because of the contract’s lack of definiteness and uncertainty in its use of the terms relationship, license, and this agreement, “the relationship (between Hernandez and the Club) loses meaning,” court records state.
The divided appellate court found that because the use of three terms in the parties’ contract – “relationship,” “license,” and “this agreement” – is not always perfectly clear, there was no meeting of the minds, and both the contract and its arbitration provision are unenforceable, court records state.
The Texas Supreme Court reversed the court of appeals’ judgment and remanded the case to the trial court with instruction to grant the motion to compel arbitration.
“The Family’s argument, and the court of appeals’ holding, that Hernandez and the Club never had a meeting of the minds on the contract blinks the reality that they operated under it for almost two years, week after week, before Hernandez’s tragic death,” the Supreme Court’s opinion states. “We hold that the parties formed the agreement reflected in the contract they signed.”
The club is represented by Hartline Barger LLP in Dallas.
Arnold & Itkin in Houston represents the plaintiffs.
Case No. 20-0782