Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 205 F.3d 44 - Jeffrey Mehler Mary Russell v. The Terminix International Company Lp

Jeffrey Mehler Mary Russell v. The Terminix International Company Lp’s Empirical Analysis

205 F.3d 44 · 2000

Citation profile

56
cited by 56 later decisions
1
states following
June 2019
most recently cited

10 federal appellate · 3 district · 2 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital v. Mercury Construction Corp. · First Options of Chicago, Inc. v. Kaplan · Volt Information Sciences Inc v. Board of Trustees of Leland Stanford Junior University · Collins & Aikman Products Co. v. Building Systems, Inc. · Lawson v. Whitey's Frame Shop

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

  1. “[W]here the contract contains an arbitration clause, there is a presumption of arbitrability in the sense that [a]n order to arbitrate the particular [claim] should not be denied unless it may be said with positive assurance that the arbitration clause is not susceptible of an interpretation that covers the asserted dispute. Doubts should be resolved in favor of coverage.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “'any controversy or claim between [the parties] arising out of or relating to' the Agreement.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[T]he relevant question is whether the dispute 'arises out of' or 'relates to' th[e] contract.... [I]t is clear that we have not limited arbitration claims to those that constitute a breach of the terms of the contract at issue.”
    2 later decisions 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.