Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 2009 OK 94 - Carter v. Schuster

Carter v. Schuster’s Empirical Analysis

2009

Citation profile

17
cited by 17 later decisions
1
states following
March 2025
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 13 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on At&T Technologies, Inc. v. Communications Workers · Thomson-Csf Sa v. American Arbitration Association · Lee v. Chica · Burdick v. Independent School District No. 52 · Bane v. Anderson, Bryant & Co.

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

  1. “estoppel, when the claims are integrally related to the contract containing the arbitration clause.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “the nonsignatory is agreeing to arbitrate”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “Because Mr. Schuster was not found to have defrauded or committed a wrongful act against Dr. Carter, but only to have breached an alleged oral agreement between the two, neither Oklahoma statutory law nor case law supports requiring him to arbitrate pursuant to a contract that he signed only as manager and agent for Apex.”
    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.