Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 147 F.3d 209 - Docket No. 96-9254

Docket No. 96-9254’s Empirical Analysis

1998

Citation profile

5
cited by 5 later decisions
December 2011
most recently cited

How this case has been cited

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently December 2011

30199820002010decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Relies on At&T Technologies, Inc. v. Communications Workers · United Paperworkers International Union v. Misco, Inc. · Ottley Seiu v. Schwartzberg · Local 453 v. Otis Elevator Company · Associated Brick Mason Contractors of Greater New York, Inc. v. Harrington

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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “The interpretation urged by the [employer] would allow any infraction, no matter how minor or what the other circumstances involved, to serve as “just cause” for any discipline, no matter how disproportionate. The potential for abuse in such an interpretation is obvious, so much so that an arbitrator could obviously conclude, in the absence of more explicit language, that it must be rejected.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[t]he Union and the employees agree that the right to operate and manage the affairs of the Society, and the right to select and direct the working forces ... are vested exclusively in the Society. These rights include ... [the rights] to employ, assign, promote, discipline, discharge, lay off, transfer and retire the employees....”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “as long as the arbitrator is even arguably construing or applying the contract and acting within the scope of his authority, that a court is convinced he committed serious error does not suffice to overturn his decision. Our cases have consistently acknowledged the broad deference due to arbitrators’ awards in this context.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.