The Beaumont Court of Appeals has denied defendant’s petition for writ of mandamus and affirmed a trial court order denying its motion to compel arbitration in a vehicle rollover case.
Service First Automotive LLC D/B/A Caliber Auto Care v. Christopher David Wamsley, Christopher Justin Wamsley, Estela Garcia, Alexander Trujillo, Carlos Perez Garcia, Luis Perez, Walmart Inc., and Mavis Tire Supply, LLC D/B/A NTB Tire & Service Center (No. 09-25-00196; January 8, 2026) arose after Christopher Wamsley sued Caliber Auto Care, among other parties, for negligence, claiming Caliber and others failed to detect his vehicle’s misalignment that resulted in a rollover accident. Caliber moved to compel arbitration, arguing that Wamsley signed multiple invoices that included an arbitration clause. Wamsley claimed in an affidavit that he was led to believe his signature was needed to authorize payment, and said at no point was he notified about an arbitration clause. The trial court denied Caliber’s motion. Caliber filed a petition for writ of mandamus.
In an opinion by Justice Wright, the court of appeals denied mandamus relief. “A party seeking to compel arbitration,” the court stated, “must establish the existence of a valid arbitration agreement and the existence of a dispute within the scope of the agreement” (citations omitted). Plaintiff did not sign the authorization line on any of the invoices but admitted that he signed separate authorizations to use his credit card each time he paid for services. Caliber cited four cases that it argued supported the proposition that “by signing card authorizations and paying for Caliber’s services on three occasions in which the receipt included a conspicuous arbitration clause, [Plaintiff was] bound by the arbitration clause even if he failed to read it or to sign it.” However, the Court of Appeals found these cases to be “inapplicable to the facts in this case.”
The court found these precedents inapplicable because it “failed to show that the credit card authorization [Plaintiff] signed expressly incorporated the arbitration clause.” Caliber provided no evidence that the documentation provided to Plaintiff after he authorized the credit card transactions notified him that the credit card authorization incorporated the arbitration agreement. It further didn’t notify Plaintiff that he agreed to arbitrate any disputes. Consequently, Caliber did not establish the existence of a valid arbitration agreement. The trial court thus did not abuse its discretion when it denied Caliber’s motion to compel arbitration.
TCJL Legal Intern Haden Knobloch researched and prepared the first draft of this article.
