In Accelerated Christian Educ., Inc. v. Oracle Corp., 925 S.W.2d 66 (Tex. App.--Dallas 1996, no writ), the Dallas Court of Appeals--rejecting, in dictum, reliance on arbitration authority--considered whether the non-signatory defendant in that case could enforce a forum-selection clause against the signatory plaintiff. Id. at 75 & 75 n.12. The Accelerated Christian Education, Inc. court rejected the argument of the plaintiff, who was opposing the forum-selection clause's enforcement, that two arbitration cases in which courts had indicated that a non-signatory party's claims could not be compelled to arbitration was analogous. Id. at 75 n.12. Although arbitration clauses are a sub-category of forum-selection clauses generally, the Accelerated Christian Education, Inc. court reasoned that "an arbitration clause, unlike a forum-selection clause, completely deprives the parties of any judicial forum for their complaints. Because a forum selection clause only specifies the judicial forum in which the parties may litigate their complaints, we do not find Garza and Longoria controlling." Id. That is, Accelerated Christian Education, Inc. appears to imply that determining whether a non-signatory may enforce an arbitration agreement may, under some circumstances, be a more narrow determination than it would be for forum-selection clauses. See id.