Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/23pdf/22-1218_5357.pdf
Page Number: 8.0

6 

SMITH v. SPIZZIRRI 

Opinion of the Court 

arbitrable  dispute  out  of  court  and  into  arbitration  as
quickly  and  easily  as  possible,”  Moses  H.  Cone  Memorial 
Hospital v. Mercury Constr. Corp., 460 U. S. 1, 22 (1983).  If 
a district court dismisses a suit subject to arbitration even
when  a  party  requests  a  stay,  that  dismissal  triggers  the 
right to an immediate appeal where Congress sought to for-
bid such an appeal.

Finally, staying rather than dismissing a suit comports
with  the  supervisory  role  that  the  FAA  envisions  for  the 
courts.  The  FAA  provides  mechanisms  for  courts  with 
proper jurisdiction to assist parties in arbitration by, for ex-
ample, appointing an arbitrator, see 9 U. S. C. §5; enforcing 
subpoenas issued by arbitrators to compel testimony or pro-
duce evidence, see §7; and facilitating recovery on an arbi-
tral award, see §9.  Keeping the suit on the court’s docket 
makes good sense in light of this potential ongoing role, and 
it avoids costs and complications that might arise if a party 
were required to bring a new suit and pay a new filing fee 
to invoke the FAA’s procedural protections.  District courts 
can, of course, adopt practices to minimize any administra-
tive burden caused by the stays that §3 requires. 

* 

* 

* 
When a district court finds that a lawsuit involves an ar-
bitrable dispute, and a party requests a stay pending arbi-
tration, §3 of the FAA compels the court to stay the proceed-
ing.  The  contrary  judgment  of  the  Court  of  Appeals  is 
reversed, and the case is remanded for further proceedings 
consistent with this opinion. 

It is so ordered.