arbitration and that are the subject of a pending action or special proceeding between the parties and that a determination of such issues is likely to make the arbitration unnecessary, the court may delay its order to arbitrate until the determination of such other issues or until such earlier time as the court specifies. Under subsection (d), if the arbitrable issue is severable from the action, the trial court may stay the arbitrable issue pending arbitration and allow litigation on the nonarbitrable issues to continue. Under subsection (f), a trial court may delay arbitration if litigation of nonarbitrable issues in an action would make the arbitration unnecessary. See, e.g., Cruz v. PacifiCare Health Sys., Inc., 80 Cal.4th 303, 320-321, 133 Cal.Rptr.2d 58, 66 P.3d 1157 (Cal.2003) (<HOLDING>); The Redemptorists v. Coulthard Serv., Inc.,
holding that such a stay is appropriate where in the absence of a stay the continuation of the proceedings in the trial court disrupts the arbitration proceedings and can render them ineffective holding that although the automatic stay only applies to proceedings against the debtor  counterclaims seeking affirmative relief against a debtor implicate the automatic stay holding that because the pending eviction proceedings do not give plaintiffs an adequate forum to challenge termination of their section 8 assistance  under the exceptions to the doctrine of younger abstention and the antiinjunction act the court may stay housing court proceedings until the validity of the termination of plaintiffs assistance can be decided holding that a district court faced with a mixed petition should stay the unexhausted claims pending exhaustion rather than dismiss them without prejudice for the same purpose it is preferable to stay proceedings pending exhaustion holding that notice of appeal of district court opinion denying arbitration stay divested district court of jurisdiction to continue proceedings until the appeal was complete