Opinion ID: 773496
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Final Decision under the Federal Arbitration Act

Text: 13 As a threshold matter, we decide whether we have jurisdiction over this appeal. Special rules govern appeals from a district court's arbitration order as set forth in section 16 of the FAA. See 9 U.S.C. § 16; see also American Express Fin. Advisors, Inc. v. Makarewicz, 122 F.3d 936 (11th Cir. 1997). The question here is whether the district court's order compelling arbitration of Bright's claim and dismissing the underlying actions is a final decision with respect to an arbitration within the meaning of the statute. 9 U.S.C. § 16(a)(3). 14 In arguing that we lack jurisdiction, Bright distinguishes between embedded and independent proceedings, a distinction this Court has recognized, albeit without using those labels. 4 See Thomson McKinnon Sec., Inc. v. Salter, 873 F.2d 1397, 1399 (11th Cir. 1989) (cited in Randolph, 178 F.3d at 1155 n.4). Bright correctly notes that, generally speaking, a decision of the district court is final when it disposes of all the issues framed by the litigation and leaves nothing for the district court to do but execute the judgment. See Randolph, 178 F.3d at 1154 (quoting Catlin v. United States, 324 U.S. 229, 233, 65 S.Ct. 631, 633 (1945)). However, Bright contends that the phrase final decision does not include an order compelling arbitration and dismissing the other claims in the action, when that order occurs in an embedded proceeding such as this one. 5 15 We find that Bright's argument is foreclosed by the Supreme Court's recent opinion in Green Tree Fin. Corp.-Alabama, 121 S.Ct. 513, 520 (2000). That decision held that a district court order compelling arbitration and dismissing all other claims is final within the meaning of § 16(a)(3), and therefore appealable, even when that order occurs in an embedded proceeding involving both a request for arbitration and other claims for relief. Green Tree Fin. Corp., 121 S.Ct. at 520-521. Here, as in Green Tree Fin. Corp., the district court directed the parties to resolve the dispute by arbitration and dismissed both cases, 6 leaving the court nothing to do but execute the judgment. Accordingly, we have jurisdiction over the consolidated actions because the arbitration order disposes of all the issues framed by the litigation and leaves nothing for the district court to resolve. 16