enter into the agreement knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently, and the agreement violated the Mississippi Arbitration Act. The response further claimed that if the agreement was not void, it nevertheless did not bind plaintiffs, as they were beneficiaries under the wrongful death statute, rather than “heirs” because “they did not inherit the cause of action because it did not exist until his wrongful death.” ¶ 7. On February 24, 2005, Hinds County Circuit Court Judge Tomie T. Green issued a Memorandum Opinion and Order Denying Motion to Compel Arbitration. Judge Green held that the agreement fell within the realm of adhesion and was unconscionable. Dr. Cleveland and CSA filed a timely notice of appeal pursuant to Tupelo Auto Sales, Ltd. v. Scott, 844 So.2d 1167, 1170 (Miss.2003) (<HOLDING>). The issues on appeal are as follows: I.
holding order denying arbitration appealable under texas law and stating that although the faa also permits a party to appeal from an interlocutory order denying a request to compel arbitration federal procedure does not apply in texas courts even when texas courts apply the federal act footnote omitted holding that when an appeal is properly taken from an underlying judgment the court of appeals has discretion to review a subsequent order denying a motion to vacate holding that the fourth circuit had jurisdiction to hear an appeal from a south carolina district courts order denying a motion to compel arbitration even though the district court also transferred the case to a georgia district court holding that on appeal from an order denying a motion to compel arbitration a court may only determine whether a dispute is subject to arbitration other contractual challenges must be determined by the arbitrator holding an appeal may be taken from an order denying a motion to compel arbitration