Cunningham v. Lyft, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
2021
Citation profile
Relationships
Applies 9 U.S.C. § 1 (Federal Arbitration Act)
Relies on Winter v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. · Copperweld Corporation v. Independence Tube Corporation · Circuit City Stores, Inc. v. Adams · United States v. Yellow Cab Co. · At&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion
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.
“). Here, by contrast, there is no evidence of any such agreements between Lyft and the airlines. Id. (internal citations omitted). This background then informed our opinion in Immediato, where we summarized our prior analysis: The term”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[t]he airlines [did] not agree to provide the relevant ground transit, and . . . neither Lyft nor Lyft drivers contract[ed] with the airlines to help the airlines perform such an undertaking.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[t]his made common sense: The typical passenger undoubtedly viewed his or her trip as one interstate journey, with the mid journey transfer smack within the flow of that trip.”
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.