“As a general rule, an arbitration clause is only binding on the parties to the underlying agreement and not on third parties.” Edward Family L.P. v. Brown, 140 P.3d 525, 530 (N.M. Ct. App. 2006). However, the New Mexico Court of Appeals has recognized the existence of an exception “based on principles of equitable estoppel”:
2006); Dan Wiebold Ford, Inc. v. Universal Computer Consulting Holding, Inc., 142 Idaho 235, 127 P.3d 138, 141 (2005); Am. Gen. Home Equity, Inc. v. Kestel, 253 S.W.3d 543, 547 n. 2 (K.y. 2008); Commonwealth v. Philip Morris Inc., 448 Mass. 836, 864 N.E.2d 505, 511 (2007); Banks v. City Fin. Co., 825 So.2d 642, 647-48 (Miss. 2002); State ex rel. Bruning v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., 275 Neb. 310, 746 N.W.2d 672, 678 (2008); Edward Family Ltd. v. Brown, 140 N.M. 104, 140 P.3d 525, 529 (Ct.App. 2006); Ass'n of Unit Owners of Bridgeview Condos. v. Dunning, 187 Or.App. 595, 69 P.3d 788, 801 (2003); Powell v. Cannon, 179 P.3d 799, 806-7 (Utah 2008); Scherer v. Schuler Custom Homes Constr., Inc., 98 P.3d 159, 162 (Wyo. 2004). We too have adopted this rule: "Courts may review an order compelling arbitration if the order also dismisses the underlying litigation so it is final rather than interlocutory.
"An order referring issues to arbitration is a final, appealable order if it is the last deliberative action of the court with respect to the controversy before it." Edward Family Ltd. P'ship v. Brown, 2006-NMCA-083, ¶ 8, 140 N.M. 104, 140 P.3d 525 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). In contrast,
{5} "An order referring issues to arbitration is a final, appealable order if it is the last deliberative action of the court with respect to the controversy before it." Edward Family Ltd. P'ship v. Brown, 2006-NMCA-083, ¶ 8, 140 N.M. 104, 140 P.3d 525 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). In contrast,