For the week of September 13, 2010, the Dallas Court of Appeals issued fifteen opinions in civil cases.  Eleven of these dispose of a case without a detailed discussion of the merits (e.g., dismissing a case for want of prosecution, dismissing a case for mootness, dismissing a case pursuant to settlement).  The remaining four cases are as follows:

Dealer Computer Servs., Inc. v. Red Hill Ford, Inc. (05-10-00983-CV) – Recites well-established rule that arbitration proceedings involving commerce are governed by the Federal Arbitration Act.

In re Empire Pipeline Corp. (05-10-01044-CV) –  Recites well-established (1) standard for reviewing traditional summary judgment; (2) elements of suit for claim on a note; (3) rule timely performance is a material term of a contract if the contract expressly makes time of the essence or if it is otherwise apparent that the parties intended time to be of the essence; (4) rule that, if time is of the essence, a party must perform in strict compliance with the time prescribed in order to be entitled to any relief; and (5) doctrine of quasi-estoppel.

Smith v. McKinney Housing Auth. (05-08-01466-CV) –Recites well-established (1) rule that a party seeking a continuance bears the burden of demonstrating sufficient cause; (2) rule that, when relying upon absence of counsel as grounds for reversal, a party must demonstrate that his lack of counsel was not the result of his own fault or negligence; and (3) standard for reviewing denial of motion for continuance.

Truestar Petroleum Corp. v. Eagle Oil & Gas Co. (05-09-00041-CV) – Recites well-established (1) standard for granting mandamus relief; and (2) rule that, unless the parties agree otherwise, that which takes place at mediation proceedings, including demeanor of parties and counsel, is confidential.