DISMISS and Opinion Filed March 19, 2020 

S 

In The 

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-19-00314-CV 

RICKIE PATTON, Appellant 

V. 

BARRY JOHNSON AND STEVEN M. JOHNSON, INDIVIDUALLY 

AND LAW OFFICES OF STEVEN M. JOHNSON, P.C. 

D/B/A THE JOHNSON LAW FIRM, Appellees 

On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 1 

Dallas County, Texas 

Trial Court Cause No. CC-16-01668-A 

MEMORANDUM OPINION 

Before Chief Justice Burns, Justice Whitehill, and Justice Nowell 

Opinion by Chief Justice Burns 

On the Court’s own motion, we vacate our opinion of November 14, 2019. 

The opinion below is now the opinion of the Court. 

Rickie Patton appeals from the trial court’s February 22, 2019 order granting 

the joint motion to compel arbitration filed by Barry Johnson and Steven Johnson 

with the Law Offices of Steven M. Johnson d/b/a the Johnson Law Firm (collectively 

JLF) and Barry Johnson. Before the Court is JLF and Johnson’s motion to dismiss 

the appeal. 
 –2– 

Patton hired JLF to represent him in a products liability lawsuit concerning an 

allegedly defective hernia mesh device. They signed an Attorney Representation 

Agreement (Agreement) that provided that any dispute would be resolved by binding 

arbitration conducted in Fort Worth. The product liability lawsuit settled. 

Anticipating that Patton would file a legal malpractice lawsuit against him and JLF, 

Barry Johnson, a former attorney with the Johnson Law Firm, filed the underlying 

lawsuit seeking a declaratory judgment as to the parties’ rights under the Agreement 

and attorney’s fees. While the lawsuit was pending, JLF initiated an arbitration 

proceeding against Patton in Fort Worth. The arbitrator dismissed the arbitration 

after concluding that Patton was not bound by the arbitration provision in the 

Agreement. 

Johnson and JLF then filed a joint motion to compel arbitration in the 

underlying lawsuit. By order signed on February 22, 2019, the trial court granted 

the motion and ordered the parties to arbitration. Patton appeals from this order. 

Under the Texas Arbitration Act (TAA), a party can appeal an order or 

judgment that either: (1) denies an application to compel arbitration made under 

section 171.021, or (2) grants an application to stay arbitration under section 

171.023. See TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE ANN. § 171.098(a)(1),(2). The TAA 

does not provide for an interlocutory appeal from an order granting a motion to 

compel arbitration. Like the TAA, the Federal Arbitration Act does not permit an 
 –3– 

interlocutory appeal from an order compelling arbitration. See 9 U.S.C. § 16; 

Chambers v. O’Quinn, 242 S.W.3d 30, 31–32 (Tex. 2007).

In their motion to dismiss, Johnson and JLF assert the appealed order granting 

their motion to compel arbitration is not subject to an interlocutory appeal. In his 

response, Patton asserts the appealed order effectively disposed of all claims and 

parties, making the order a final and appealable judgment. By ordering the parties 

to arbitration, Patton asserts, the trial court awarded the declaratory relief sought. 

The trial court’s order, however, is not a final judgment. Although the order lacks 

the mandatory stay required by section 171.021(c) of the civil practice and remedies 

code, it includes none of the hallmarks of finality, nor does it dismiss the case.1

 See 

In re Gulf Exploration, LLC, 289 S.W.3d 836, 840 (Tex. 2009). Moreover, Johnson 

filed a counterclaim and a cross claim after the order was entered, and thus the order 

did not encompass those claims. See Lehmann v. Har-Con Corp., 39 S.W.3d 191, 

195 (Tex. 2001) (final judgment is one that disposes of all parties and claims). 

Alternatively, Patton asserts the order is an appealable interlocutory order 

because it effectively vacated the prior arbitrator’s dismissal of the proceeding after 

finding that Patton was not bound by the arbitration provision in the Agreement. See 

 

1

 We observe that Johnson’s original petition specifically requested that after the trial court granted his 

requested declaration and compelled the parties to arbitration, it should “retain jurisdiction to enter 

judgment upon any award rendered in such arbitration proceedings.” Such relief appropriately recognizes 

that as explained in Gulf Exploration, trial courts should typically stay cases in which the parties are 

compelled to arbitration to allow the trial court to address incidental issues that may arise during the 

arbitration. See In re Gulf Exploration, LLC, 289 S.W.3d at 841. 
 –4– 

9 U.S.C. § 16 (a)(1)(E) (an order vacating an arbitration award is subject to an 

interlocutory appeal). The prior arbitrator, however, dismissed the arbitration 

without making any award. Thus, there was no award to vacate. 

Statutory law does not permit an appeal from an order compelling arbitration. 

See TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE ANN. § 171.098(a)(1),(2); 9 U.S.C. § 16. For this 

reason, we grant appellees’ motion and dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction. 

See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(a). 

1900314F.P05 

 

/Robert D. Burns, III/ 

ROBERT D. BURNS, III 

CHIEF JUSTICE 
 –5– 

S 

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

JUDGMENT 

RICKIE PATTON, Appellant 

No. 05-19-00314-CV V. 

BARRY JOHNSON AND STEVEN M. 

JOHNSON, INDIVIDUALLY AND LAW 

OFFICES OF STEVEN M. JOHNSON, 

P.C., D/B/A THE JOHNSON LAW FIRM, 

Appellee 

 On Appeal from the County Court at Law 

No. 1, Dallas County, Texas 

Trial Court Cause No. CC-16-01668-A. 

Opinion delivered by Chief Justice Burns. 

Justices Whitehill and Nowell participating. 

 We WITHDRAW our opinion and VACATE our judgment of November 14, 2019. This 

is now the judgment of the Court. In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, the appeal 

is DISMISSED for want of jurisdiction.

 It is ORDERED that appellee BARRY JOHNSON AND STEVEN M. JOHNSON, 

INDIVIDUALLY AND LAW OFFICES OF STEVEN M. JOHNSON, P.C., D/B/A THE 

JOHNSON LAW FIRM recover their costs of this appeal from appellant RICKIE PATTON. 

Judgment entered this 19th day of March 2020.