in fact come out both ways. See, e.g., Crack Team USA Inc. v. Am. Arbitration Ass’n, 128 S.W.3d 580, 583 (Mo.Ct.App.2004) (dismissing appeal). Although the Court cites a Massachusetts case that appears to allow an appeal from an order that denies confirmation and directs a rehearing, the case never discusses the nature of the interlocutory order, or the authority on which it grants the appeal. See Fazio v. Employers’ Liab. Assurance Corp., 347 Mass. 254, 197 N.E.2d 598, 600 (1964). More recent Massachusetts decisions have directly addressed the issue of orders to vacate with a rehearing (without denying confirmation), and have denied the right of appeal — without even citing Fazio. See Suffolk County Sheriffs Dep’t v. AFSCME Council 93, 50 Mass.App.Ct. 473, 737 N.E.2d 1276, 1277 (2000) (<HOLDING>); School Comm. of Quincy v. Quincy Educ. Ass’n,
holding that a rehearing order is interlocutory and not appealable holding sanction included in final judgment appealable holding that a rehearing order was not final or appealable holding that the ordering of a rehearing caused the judgment to not be final and appealable holding that a district court judgment is not a final judgment appealable by the defendant unless it includes the final adjudication and the final sentence