In Maestle v. Best Buy Co., 100 Ohio St.3d 330, 2003 Ohio 6465, 800 N.E.2d 7, the Ohio Supreme Court noted that a motion to compel arbitration and a motion to stay proceedings are separate and distinct procedures which serve different purposes. A party may choose to move for a stay, petition for an order to compel arbitration, or seek both. Id. at P18. The Maestle court held that a trial court is not required to conduct a hearing when a party moves for a stay pursuant to R.C. 2711.02, but may stay proceedings "upon being satisfied that the issue involved in the action is referable to arbitration under an agreement in writing for arbitration." The Maestle court noted further that "by its terms, R.C. 2711.03 applies where there has been a petition for an order to compel the parties to proceed to arbitration." Id. at P15. This statute provides: "(A) The party aggrieved by the alleged failure of another to perform under a written agreement for arbitration may petition any court of common pleas having jurisdiction of the party so failing to perform for an order directing that the arbitration proceed in the manner provided for in the written agreement. The court shall hear the parties, and, upon being satisfied that the making of the agreement for arbitration or the failure to comply with the agreement is not in issue, the court shall make an order directing the parties to proceed to arbitration in accordance with the agreement." "(B) If the making of the arbitration agreement or the failure to perform it is in issue in a petition filed under division (A) of this section, the court shall proceed summarily to the trial of that issue."