Hodges v. Reasonover’s Empirical Analysis
2012
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 17 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 9 U.S.C. § 1 (Federal Arbitration Act)
Relies on Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital v. Mercury Construction Corp. · Mitsubishi Motors Corporation v. Soler Chrysler-Plymouth Inc Soler Chrysler-Plymouth Inc · Green Tree Financial Corp.-Alabama v. Randolph · Plaquemines Par. Com'n Council v. Delta Dev. Co. · 701 So. 2d 1291 - Reeder v. North
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 22 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A provision in any written contract to settle by arbitration a controversy thereafter arising out of the contract, or out of the refusal to perform the whole or any part thereof, or an agreement in writing between two or more persons to submit to arbitration any controversy existing between them at the time of the agreement to submit, shall be |4valid, irrevocable, and enforceable, save upon such grounds as exist at law or in equity for the revocation of any contract.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“At a minimum, the attorney must disclose the following legal effects of binding arbitration, assuming they are applicable: • Waiver of the right to a jury trial; • Waiver of the right to an appeal; • Waiver of the right to broad discovery under ... Federal Rules of Civil Procedure; • Arbitration may involve substantial upfront costs compared to litigation; • Explicit disclosure of the nature of claims covered by the arbitration clause, such as fee disputes or malpractice claims; • The arbitration clause does not impinge upon the client’s right to make a disciplinary complaint to the appropriate authorities; • The client has the opportunity to speak with independent counsel before signing the contract.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Bezio v. Draeger“Agreements prospectively limiting a lawyer’s liability for malpractice are prohibited unless the client is independently represented in making the agreement because they are likely to undermine competent and diligent representation. Also, many clients are unable to evaluate the desirability of making such an agreement before a dispute has arisen, particularly if they are then represented by the lawyer seeking the agreement. This paragraph does not, however, prohibit a lawyer from entering into an agreement with the client to arbitrate legal malpractice claims, provided such agreements are enforceable and the client is fully informed of the scope and effect of the agreement....”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.