







Memorandum Opinion filed October 27, 2005








Memorandum Opinion filed October 27, 2005.
 
 
In The
 
Fourteenth Court of Appeals
____________
 
NO.
14-05-00748-CV
____________
 
BILL
HEARD CHEVROLET, LTD., BILL HEARD CHEVROLET CORP., and 
BILL HEARD CHEVROLET
MANAGEMENT, LLC, Appellants
 
V.
 
EHIOZUWA J. AGBONAYINMA,
Appellee
________________________________________________________________
 
On Appeal from the 240th
District Court
Fort Bend County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No.
05-CV-142,432
________________________________________________________________
 
M E M O R A N D U M   O
P I N I O N
Appellants
bring this appeal from the trial court=s Order Granting Petition for Rule
202 Deposition.  It appears from that
order the trial court deferred its ruling on the issue of arbitrability until
after the Rule 202 Deposition has been taken.[1]  




The
trial court=s order granting the Petition for
Rule 202 Deposition is not an appealable interlocutory order.  Therefore we have no jurisdiction except to
declare the interlocutory nature of the order and dismiss the appeal.  Tex.
R. App. P. 42.3(a); Yancey v. Jacob Stern & Sons, Inc., 564
S.W.2d 487, 488 (Tex.Civ.App.BHouston [1st Dist.] 1978, no writ); Lipshy Motorcars, Inc.
v. Sovereign Assoc.'s, Inc., 944 S.W.2d 68, 70 (Tex. App.BDallas 1997, no writ).
 
The
trial court has not ruled on the motion to compel arbitration.  Because there is no order denying the motion
from which to appeal, we do not have jurisdiction.  See City of Galveston v. Gray, 93
S.W.3d 587, 590 (Tex. App.BHouston [14th Dist.] 2002, orig. proceeding).
For
these reasons, the appeal is ordered dismissed.
 
PER CURIAM
 
Judgment rendered and Memorandum Opinion filed October
27, 2005.
Panel consists of Justices Fowler, Edelman, and
Guzman. 
Do Not Publish.
 
 




[1]   These
matters are also before this court in a petition for writ of mandamus, In re
Bill Heard Chevrolet, Ltd. d/b/a Bill Heard Chevrolet-Sugar Land,
14-05-00744-CV.  
 


