In September 2025, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court tackled a significant procedural issue: whether an order compelling arbitration in ongoing litigation is immediately appealable as a collateral order. In Chilutti v. Uber Technologies, Inc., the plaintiffs, Shannon and Keith Chilutti, sued Uber and others for injuries allegedly sustained during a ride in a wheelchair-accessible Uber vehicle. Uber responded by invoking the arbitration clause in its user agreement and successfully petitioned the trial court to compel arbitration, staying the litigation. The Chiluttis appealed, and the Superior Court ruled in their favor, holding that the Order at issue qualified as an appealable collateral order because postponing review “may” result in irreparable loss to the Chiluttis’ claims. Ultimately, the Supreme Court held that such an order does not constitute an immediately appealable collateral order and the Superior Court erred in holding to the contrary. This holding has broad implications, ensuring that litigation will generally proceed to a final judgment before appellate review of arbitration enforcement, preventing a flood of immediate appeals that could bog down the courts and increase costs for business defendants.