the lawsuit. See Tex. Const, art. V, § 8 (stating that “[district court jurisdiction consists of exclusive, appellate, and original jurisdiction of all actions, proceedings, and remedies, except in cases where exclusive, appellate, or original jurisdiction may be conferred by this Constitution or other law on some other court, tribunal, or administrative body”). When two defendants in the lawsuit, HOME and WUIC, filed a motion to compel arbitration based on the arbitration provision set forth in the written warranty agreement, which Appellants also had signed, the trial court had a nondiscretion-ary duty to rule upon the arbitration issue, including which parties would be compelled to arbitration. See, e.g., In re Weekley Homes, L.P., 180 S.W.3d 127, 135 (Tex.2005) (orig. proceeding) (<HOLDING>). And the trial court retains jurisdiction even
recognizing that in reviewing ruling on motion to compel arbitration we first determine whether party seeking arbitration established existence of arbitration agreement holding that a party seeking to compel arbitration must establish the existence of an arbitration agreement and show that the claims raised fall within the scope of that agreement holding that once the party seeking to compel arbitration establishes the existence of an arbitration agreement and that the claims raised fall within the scope of that agreement the trial court must compel arbitration holding that in ruling on a motion to compel arbitration a court must consider 1 whether the parties have entered into a valid arbitration agreement 2 whether an arbitrable issue exists and 3 whether the right to arbitration has been waived holding trial court must decide whether to compel arbitration of personal injury claim of party who was not signatory to arbitration agreement