Singh v. Uber Technologies Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
2017
Citation profile
1 district ·
Relationships
Applies 29 U.S.C. § 157 (§ 7 of the National Labor Relations Act) · 29 U.S.C. § 158 (§ 8 of the National Labor Relations Act) · 9 U.S.C. § 1 (Federal Arbitration Act)
Relies on Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital v. Mercury Construction Corp. · At&T Technologies, Inc. v. Communications Workers · First Options of Chicago, Inc. v. Kaplan · Gilmer v. Interstate/Johnson Lane Corp. · Green Tree Financial Corp.-Alabama v. Randolph
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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“WHETHER TO AGREE TO ARBITRATION IS AN IMPORTANT BUSINESS DECISION. IT IS YOUR DECISION TO MAKE, AND YOU SHOULD NOT RELY SOLELY UPON THE INFORMATION PROVIDED IN THIS AGREEMENT. AS- IT . IS NOT INTENDED TO CONTAIN A COMPLETE EXPLANATION OF THE CONSEQUENCES OF ARBITRATION. YOU SHOULD TAKE REASONABLE STEPS TO CONDUCT FURTHER RESEARCH AND TO CONSULT WITH OTHERS—INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO AN ATTORNEY—REGARDING THE CONSEQUENCES OF YOUR DECISION, JUST AS YOU WOULD WHEN MAKING ANY OTHER IMPORTANT BUSINESS OR LIFE DECISION.”
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.