The Court is hearing three arguments on Thursday morning. I wrote quick overviews of these cases when they were granted — the topics include when attorneys fees can be available to a defendant under the DTPA and whether a dishonored check is a “contract” that can support an award of attorneys fees.
The third case, CMH Homes Inc., et al. v. Adam Perez, No. 10-0688 (DDB), is about the proper way to challenge a trial court’s order appointing an arbitrator to break the parties’ impasse — by interlocutory appeal or by mandamus. The provision involved is Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code § 51.016 — a relatively new statute authorizing interlocutory appeals “under the same circumstances that a federal district court’s order would be permitted….”
But for Court watchers, the attraction of that argument may be the return of former Justice Brister to the Court as an advocate.
Among other things, he was known for colorful hypotheticals. He once asked an advocate to imagine “[i]f we velcroed the Sword of Damocles right over the spot where you’re standing…”
On reflection, that seems like a pretty fair description of how oral argument itself can feel. And on Thursday, that podium will be his.
Other coverage: Texas Supreme Court to Hear Interlocutory Appeal of an Arbitral Order (Disputing)