Opinion ID: 2828999
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Precedent and statutory interpretation instruct us to treat an order vacating an award and directing a rehearing as the functional equivalent of an order granting a new trial.

Text: The Court takes issue with the analogy drawn between the district court’s order in this case and the granting of a motion for new trial. ___ S.W.3d at ___ (“The Company argues that the district court’s order should not be appealable because it was like granting a motion for new trial in a case, which is not appealable. But the analogy does not fit.”). Whether the Court can find a more fitting analogy is beside the point: both precedent and the statute itself direct us to treat much of the process as we would a civil trial, and “an order vacating an arbitration award and directing a rehearing is the functional equivalent of an order granting a new trial.” Stolhandske , 14 S.W.3d at 814; see also Bison Bldg. Materials, Ltd. v. Aldridge , 263 S.W.3d 69, 75 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2006, pet. granted) (holding that order to vacate award and order new arbitration “‘is the functional equivalent of an order granting a new trial’” and therefore not subject to direct appellate review (quoting Stolhandske , 14 S.W.3d at 814)); Thrivent , 251 S.W.3d at 623 (same); Me. Dep’t of Transp. , 581 A.2d at 815 (holding that barring appeal from an order that vacates an arbitration award and directs a rehearing “is consistent with the policy of barring an immediate appeal from the granting of a new trial in a civil case”); Minn. Teamsters Pub. & Law Enforcement Employees Union, Local No. 320 v. County of Carver , 571 N.W.2d 598, 599 (Minn. Ct. App. 1997) (holding that order vacating award and ordering rehearing is analogous to order granting new trial). Notably, the TAA looks to civil court procedure to define how parties are to conduct multiple aspects of the arbitration and appeals process, including the taking of oaths, Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 171.049, depositions, id . § 171.050(b), subpoenas, id . § 171.051(d), witness fees, id . § 171.052, notice requirements, id . § 171.093, service of process for subsequent applications, id . § 171.095(a), and, most relevant of all, appealing orders: “The appeal shall be taken in the manner and to the same extent as an appeal from an order or judgment in a civil action,” id . § 171.098(b). Because the appeal must be taken “in the same manner” and “to the same extent” as an appeal from a judgment in a civil action, we have no discretion to ignore the interlocutory character of the trial court’s rehearing order.