Opinion · Supreme Court of Alabama

Long v. INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT BD.

619 So. 2d 1387

Type
Opinion
Court
Supreme Court of Alabama
Jurisdiction
Alabama
Date
1993-05-07
Topic
international-arbitration

Junius Long filed the present lawsuit against the Industrial Development Board of the Town of Vincent and H.L. Fuller Construction Company, Inc. (hereinafter "Fuller"), for the enforcement of a lien. In November 1989, the trial court granted Fuller's motion to compel arbitration and for a stay of the proceedings, pursuant to an arbitration agreement between the parties. The case was removed from the active docket and placed on the administrative docket.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed Long v. INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT BD.. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

Cited by
15 opinions
LONG v. INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT BD.,619 So.2d 1387(Ala. 1993)
619 So.2d 1387
Junius LONG, d/b/a Long Industrial Service, Inc. v. INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT
BOARD OF the TOWN OF VINCENT, et al.
1911891.
Supreme Court of Alabama.
May 7, 1993.
Appeal from the Circuit Court, Shelby County, No. (CV-88-073), D. Al Crowson, J.
E. Paul Jones, Alexander City, for appellant.

Wanda D. Devereaux and Kathleen A. Brown of Devereaux Associates, Montgomery; and Hewitt L. Conwill of Conwill Justice, Columbiana, for Indust. Development Bd. of Town of Vincent, Alabama, and First Alabama Bank.

G. Daniel Brown, Alexander City, and D. Lee Roberts, Jr. of Smith, Currie Hancock, Atlanta, GA, for H.L. Fuller Const. Co., Inc.
INGRAM, Justice.
Junius Long filed the present lawsuit against the Industrial Development Board of the Town of Vincent and H.L. Fuller Construction Company, Inc. (hereinafter "Fuller"), for the enforcement of a lien. In November 1989, the trial court granted Fuller's motion to compel arbitration and for a stay of the proceedings, pursuant to an arbitration agreement between the parties. The case was removed from the active docket and placed on the administrative docket. Long did not take the necessary steps to comply with the order to arbitrate the dispute, and in May 1992, Fuller filed a motion with the trial court to enforce its November 1989 order compellingPage 1388arbitration. In July 1992, the trial court granted Fuller's motion. Long filed a notice of appeal with this Court, contending that the July 1992 order compelling arbitration was in error. He argues in his brief that this appeal was taken pursuant to9 U.S.C. § 16.

In cases where the Federal Arbitration Act is applicable,9 U.S.C. § 16allows an appeal from a denial of a motion to compel arbitration.A.G. Edwards Sons, Inc. v. Clark,558 So.2d 358(Ala. 1990). However, it does not allow an appeal from a grant of a motion to compel arbitration.A.G. Edwards.Rather, a petition for a writ of mandamus is the proper means to test a trial court's granting of a motion to arbitrate or thegrantingof a stay pending arbitration.Jones v. MerrillLynch, Pierce, Fenner Smith, Inc.,604 So.2d 332(Ala. 1991);Ex parte Alexander,558 So.2d 364(Ala. 1990).

The trial court granted Fuller's motion to compel arbitration in November 1989. The proper method of review of that decision would have been a petition for a writ of mandamus. Long had a remedy but failed to seek it; this appeal is due to be dismissed.

APPEAL DISMISSED.

HORNSBY, C.J., and ALMON, ADAMS and STEAGALL, JJ., concur.