210 Mich. App. 576 - Dick v. Dick’s Empirical Analysis
1995
Citation profile
19 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 23 later decisions — most recently April 2014
19 state decisions
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.
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 23 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“We recognize our obligation to read the language of the arbitration statute in light of previously established rules of common law. We acknowledge that well-settled common-law principles are not to be abolished by implication; an ambiguous statute that contravenes common law must be interpreted so as to make the least change in the common law.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. In Re Lott“no clear prohibition in case law, court rule, or statute against the use of binding arbitration in the resolution of custody disputes”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[b]inding arbitration is an acceptable and appropriate method of dispute resolution in cases where the parties agree to it.”
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.