CARIBBEAN TRANSPORTATION, INC., APPELLANT,
v.
FRANCISCO J. ACEVEDO, JORGE LUIS ALVAREZ, CESAR A. ARIAS, ADRIAN AVILA, JORGE L. BERNAL, ET AL., APPELLEES
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Caribbean Transportation appeals from a trial court order staying proceedings and retaining jurisdiction pending arbitration of employee claims under a collective bargaining agreement. The court dismisses the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the appeal does not challenge the trial court's determination of entitlement to arbitration, which is the only basis for interlocutory review.
The appeal must be dismissed for want of jurisdiction because Caribbean's sole argument on appeal—that the trial court should have dismissed rather than stayed the action—does not relate to entitlement to arbitration, which is the only basis for interlocutory appellate review of such orders under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.130(a)(3)(C)(v).
[1] An order staying an action pending arbitration and retaining jurisdiction is not a final, appealable order.
[2] An appeal from an order determining entitlement to arbitration is permissible as an interlocutory appeal under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.130(a)(3)(C)(v) only…
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“Since the action remains pending below, there is no final appealable order. We have jurisdiction to entertain this as an interlocutory appeal only if it falls within the scope of Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.130(a)(3)(C)(v), which authorizes '[r]eview of non-final orders of lower tribunals ... that ... determine ... the entitlement of a party to arbitration.'”
Establishes the jurisdictional basis for interlocutory appeals of arbitration orders
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceOn remand from a prior appellate decision, the trial court determined that employees' claims were subject to arbitration under an applicable collectiv…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Final Appealable Order cases and more on FLexlaw
COPE, Judge.
Caribbean Transportation Inc. appeals from an order staying this action and retaining jurisdiction pending arbitration. We dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction.
On remand from this court’s decision in Acevedo v. Caribbean Transp., Inc., 673 So. 2d 170 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996), the trial court determined that the claims of plaintiffs-ap-pellees were subject to arbitration under an applicable collective bargaining agreement. The trial court referred the claims to arbitration, stayed proceedings, and retained jurisdiction to enforce the arbitration award.* Defendant-appellant Caribbean has appealed, contending that the trial court should have dismissed the action entirely, instead of retaining jurisdiction to enforce the arbitration award. Since the action remains pending below, there is no final appealable order. We have jurisdiction to entertain this as an interlocutory appeal only if it falls within the scope of Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.130(a)(3)(C)(v), which authorizes “[rjeview of non-final orders of lower tribunals ... that ... determine ... the entitlement of a party to arbitration.... ”
On this appeal, Caribbean does not challenge the trial court’s ruling that Caribbean is entitled to arbitration of these claims as a matter of federal labor law. The only issue presented by Caribbean on this appeal is whether the trial court should have dismissed the action instead of staying it. Since Caribbean’s sole point on appeal does not relate to its entitlement to arbitration, Caribbean’s appeal is not within the scope of Rule 9.130. We therefore dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction.
Treating the appeal as a petition for writ of certiorari, we deny the petition. Caribbean has not demonstrated that the trial court departed from the essential requirements of law, nor has it shown how it will suffer an injury which cannot be remedied by an appeal at the conclusion of the case.
Appeal dismissed; certiorari denied.
*
The trial court order contains an ambiguous statement indicating that the defendant-appellant's "Motion to Dismiss Action is granted on the basis that all claims are subject to arbitration.” When the order is read as a whole, however, it is properly viewed as a ruling that the plaintiffs’ claims are not subject to adjudication in the trial court, but that the action will remain pending and stayed for purposes of proceedings to enforce the arbitration award. The parties have so interpreted the order.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Lennar Homes, LLC v. Martinique at the Oasis Neighborhood Assocation, Inc. (Fla. 3d DCA 2021)…nonfinal order, and the denial of a motion to dismiss for failure to name indispensable parties or for lack of standing is not listed as an appealable nonfinal order in rule 9.130(a).”) (emphasis added). See also Caribbean Transp., Inc. v. Acevedo, 698 So. 2d 604, 605 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997); Fla. Ins. Guar. v. Still, 154 So. 3d 422 (Fla. 5th DCA 2014). Our holding is limited to a determination, consistent with Pulte Home Corp. v. Vermillion Homeowners Ass'n, Inc., 109 So. 3d 233, 235 (Fla. 2d DCA 2013), that the…
Authorities Cited
- Acevedo v. Caribbean Transp., Inc., 673 So. 2d 170 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996)