essential question is whether, under the totality of the circumstances, the defaulting party has acted inconsistently with the arbitration right. Raymond James, 896 So.2d at 711 (quoting with approval Nat’l Found. for Cancer Research v. A.G. Edwards & Sons, Inc., 821 F.2d 772, 774 (D.C.Cir.1987)). In the case before us, the Bank did more than participate in a lawsuit; it initiated the lawsuit. “Initiating a lawsuit, or on the part of a defendant, 3d DCA 1996) (explaining that when contractor filed a complaint for breach of contract and quantum meruit, and filed a notice of lis pen-dens, without also moving to stay the proceedings pending arbitration until 21 days later, contractor waived right to demand arbitration); Hough v. JKP Dev., Inc., 654 So.2d 1241, 1241 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995) (<HOLDING>). In fact, the Bank did not file motion to
holding that in ruling on a motion to compel arbitration a court must consider 1 whether the parties have entered into a valid arbitration agreement 2 whether an arbitrable issue exists and 3 whether the right to arbitration has been waived holding that the party demanding arbitration had waived its right to arbitrate by filing eight months earlier a complaint against the other party to the arbitration agreement holding denial of mandamus challenging arbitration order did not bar appeal of that order after arbitration was completed holding plaintiff waived right to arbitration by not simultaneously requesting a stay and an order of arbitration at the time of the complaint holding that action of filing a complaint and notice of lis pendens based on a contract without simultaneously requesting a stay and an order compelling arbitration waives that partys contractual right to arbitrate