Garrity v. McCaskey’s Empirical Analysis

1992

Citation profile

490

cited by 490 later decisions

states following

July 2025

most recently cited

3 federal appellate · 483 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 490 later decisions — most recently July 2025 · most notably Reid v. Zoning Board of Appeals (1996), White v. Kampner (1994)

3 federal appellate · 483 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.

Relationships

Applies 9 U.S.C. § 10 (Federal Arbitration Act)

Relies on Wilko v. Swan · American Universal Insurance v. DelGreco · Estate of Thornton v. Caldor, Inc. · Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc. v. Bobker · O & G/O'Connell Joint Venture v. Chase Family Ltd. Partnership No. 3

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

“The authority of an arbitrator to adjudicate the controversy is limited only if the agreement contains express language restricting the breadth of issues, reserving explicit rights, or conditioning the award on court review. In the absence of any such qualifications, an agreement is unrestricted.”
17 later decisions quote this exact passage
e.g. R. G. Vadney, Inc. v. Teamsters, Local 443, No. Cv 95-0376587 (Dec. 9, 1996) · Afscme v. City of New London, No. 54 16 78 (Sep. 27, 1999)
“extraordinary lack of fidelity to established legal principles.”
17 later decisions quote this exact passage
e.g. Wm. R. Peterson Oil Co., Inc. v. Chadwick, No. 71804 (Jun. 7, 1994) · Middlefield v. Afscme, Local 1303-283, No. Cv-01-0096024s (Mar. 28, 2003)
“(1) the award rules on the constitutionality of a statute . . . (2) the award violates clear public policy . . . (3) the award contravenes one or more of the statutory proscriptions of 52-418 .”
13 later decisions quote this exact passage
e.g. Wu v. Chang, A.C. No. 22179 (Dec. 21, 2001) · Afscme v. City of New London, No. 54 16 78 (Sep. 27, 1999)

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.