HOUSTON - The 14th Court of Appeals today reversed a judgment denying a company’s motion to compel arbitration in a personal injury lawsuit.
Court records show the lawsuit was brought by Zach Young, who sued GSC Wholesale, doing business as Grocers Supply Produce.
According to the 14th Court’s opinion, Young was hired by GSC in 2014. On June 25, 2019, Young claims he suffered work related injuries when “a fork lift began to roll and pinned” him.
Young filed a lawsuit and the Grocers Supply parties responded by filing a motion to compel arbitration, which relied upon the “GSC Wholesale, LLC Mutual Agreement to Arbitrate Occupational Injury and Disease Claims,” signed by Young on Jan. 29, 2015.
The Grocers Supply parties asserted that the arbitration agreement is valid and that Young’s claims fall within its scope. It is undisputed that neither of the Grocers Supply Parties signed the agreement, the opinion states.
The trial court denied the motion to compel arbitration, finding that the evidence presented shows that the defendant’s signature was a condition precedent to the agreement’s enforceability, making the arbitration agreement unenforceable, court records state.
On appeal, the Grocers Supply parties asserted that the trial court erred in denying the motion to compel, arguing in part that they need not rely on the arbitration agreement because they may rely upon a similar arbitration agreement contained in the Grocers Supply parties’ “Non-Subscriber Occupational Injury Plan.”
The 14th Court concluded that because the Grocers Supply parties met the burden to establish the existence of a valid arbitration agreement and that the claims fall within the scope of the agreement, the burden shifted to Young to raise a valid defense to the agreement’s enforcement.
“Because Young submitted no evidence supporting such a defense, the trial court was required to compel arbitration,” the opinion states. “Therefore, the trial court erred in denying the motion to compel.”
Case No. 14-20-00871-CV