Martha Guadalajara, In dividually and as representative of the Estate of

a



# Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas

August 15, 2013

N o. 04

- 13

- 00525

- CV

PAM TRANSPORT INC. , Victor Soza, Pam Cartage Carriers, LLC f/k/a Pam Dedicated

Services, Inc., Pam Transportation Services , Inc.,

Appellants

v.

Martha GUADALAJARA , Individually and as representative of the Estate of Roberto Guadalajara

- Garza and as next friend of Roberto Ivan Guadalajara, Edgardo Guadalajara Isual Guadalajara, Kimberly Guadalajara, et al,

Appellees

From th e 365th Judicial District Court, Maverick County, Texas

Trial Court No. 10

- 06

- 25301

- MCVAJA Honorable Amado J. Abascal, III, Judge Presiding



### O R D E R

Appellants seek to appeal from an interlocutory order denying a motion to compel arbitration. See T EX

. C IV

. P RAC

. & R EM

. C ODE A NN

. 51.016 (West Supp. 2012) (providing that in a matter subject to the Federal Arbitration Act, a person may take an appeal from an interlocutory order under the same circumstances that an appeal from a federal court’s order would be p ermitted). On August 6, 2013, appellants filed a motion to stay all trial court proceedings, including discovery and motion practice, until this appeal is resolved. On August 13, 2013, appellees filed a response to appellants’ motion to stay all trial cour t proceedings. This response also contains a request that this appeal be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

While an appeal from an interlocutory order is pending, the trial court retains jurisdiction over the case and, unless prohibited by statute, may make further orders. T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 29.5. If permitted by law, the trial court may even proceed with a trial on the merits. Id . However, the trial court must not make an order that interferes with or impairs the jurisdiction of the appellate court, or the effectiveness of any relief sought or that may be granted on appeal. Id

. In their notice of appeal, appellants claim they are entitled to an appeal of the trial court’s interlocutory order based on section 51.016 of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code. This statute, however, does not expressly require a stay of the trial court proceedings during thependency of an appeal from an interlocutory order. See T EX

. C IV

. P RAC

. & R EM

. C ODE A NN

.

51.016. Moreover, nothing indicates the appellants asked the tr ial court to stay its proceedings before asking this court to stay the trial court’s proceedings. See id

. ; see also T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 29.2 (providing that the trial court may permit an order granting interlocutory relief to be superseded and, if the trial co urt refuses, the appellate court may review the decision for an abuse of discretion).

Appellant s ’ motion to stay all trial court proceedings is therefore DENIED. It is FURTHER ORDERED that appellees’ request to dismiss this appeal for lack of jurisdiction is CARRIED WITH THIS APPEAL.

_________________________________ Karen Angelini, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affi xed the seal of the said court on this 15th day of August, 2013

.

___________________________________ Keith E. Hottle Clerk of Court