Case Name: FISHER ISLAND HOLDINGS, L.L.C., Appellant, v. Dr. Irwin POTASH, in his capacity as one of a majority of Equity Member Directors of Fisher Island Club, Inc., and on behalf of the Equity Members of Fisher Island Club, Inc., and Fisher Island Club, Inc., a Florida not-for-profit corporation, Appellees
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 2004-02-04
Citations: 867 So. 2d 450
Docket Number: No. 3D03-3334
Parties: FISHER ISLAND HOLDINGS, L.L.C., Appellant, v. Dr. Irwin POTASH, in his capacity as one of a majority of Equity Member Directors of Fisher Island Club, Inc., and on behalf of the Equity Members of Fisher Island Club, Inc., and Fisher Island Club, Inc., a Florida not-for-profit corporation, Appellees.
Judges: Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and COPE, J., and BARKDULL, THOMAS H., JR., Senior Judge.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 867
Pages: 450–450

Head Matter:
FISHER ISLAND HOLDINGS, L.L.C., Appellant, v. Dr. Irwin POTASH, in his capacity as one of a majority of Equity Member Directors of Fisher Island Club, Inc., and on behalf of the Equity Members of Fisher Island Club, Inc., and Fisher Island Club, Inc., a Florida not-for-profit corporation, Appellees.
No. 3D03-3334.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
Feb. 4, 2004.
Greenberg Traurig, P.A., and Alan T. Dimond, Elliot H. Scherker, and Elliot B. Kula, Miami; Phillips, Eisinger & Brown, Hollywood, for appellant.
Aragon, Burlington, Weil, Schwiep, Kap-lan & Blonsky, P.A., and Robert K. Burlington, Daniel F. Blonsky, and Alejandro F. Hoyos, Miami, for appellees.
Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and COPE, J., and BARKDULL, THOMAS H., JR., Senior Judge.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
We reverse an order of the trial court staying and abating an arbitration instituted by Fisher Island Holdings, L.L.C. ("Holdings"), a non-party to the litigation pending between the appellees. No jurisdiction over Holdings was obtained by judicial process, and Holdings did not voluntarily appear in the pending litigation by seeking any affirmative relief. Therefore, it was inappropriate to enter the order under review. See ATM Ltd. v. Caporicci Footwear Ltd., Corp., 867 So.2d 413, 2003 WL 22900630 (Fla. 3d DCA December 10, 2003); Norville v. BellSouth Advertising & Pub. Corp., 664 So.2d 16 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995); Moretto v. Staub, 370 So.2d 1220 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979).
This matter is returned to the trial court, which may consider appropriate proceedings to formally bring Holdings within the pending litigation as an interested party.
Reversed and remanded with directions.