Sometimes a seemingly minor Supreme Court decision contains important messages. So it is with Smith v. Spizzirri (US S Ct 05/15/2024). Unanimous opinion: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/22-1218_5357.pdf

 The question was whether a trial court has the option to dismiss a case pending arbitration rather than issuing a stay of the proceedings. The answer is "No." When a lawsuit involves an arbitrable dispute, Federal Arbitration Act §3 requires a court to stay the proceeding upon request. The Supreme Court says (spoiler alert) that this means a stay – not a dismissal.

 Important statutory interpretation principles were involved – statutory text, structure, and purpose. These typically guide the Court in all statutory cases.

 Text: Section 3 uses the words "shall" and "stay." That's the plain text. The Court said, "When §3 says that a court 'shall . . . stay' the proceeding, the court must do so." Oh, yes, and Black's 1920 Dictionary says "stay" means a “temporary suspension” of legal proceedings, not a termination of the proceedings. This allows parties to return to court if the arbitration breaks down.

 Structure and purpose: FAA §16 authorizes an immediate interlocutory appeal when a court denies a request for arbitration, but an order compelling arbitration is not immediately appealable. If a court dismisses a case, that triggers the right to an immediate appeal where Congress sought to forbid such an appeal. Also, keeping the case on the court's docket makes good sense in the event there is a need to enforce a subpoena or to confirm an award.