Cargill Rice Incorporated v. Empresa Nicaraguense Dealimentos Basicos Empresa Nicaraguense Dealimentos Basicos’s Empirical Analysis
25 F.3d 223 · 1994
Citation profile
13 federal appellate · 1 district · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 27 later decisions — most recently February 2018 · most notably Brook v. Peak International, Ltd. (2002), R.J. O'brien & Assoc., Inc. v. Pipkin (1995)
13 federal appellate · 1 district · 3 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 28 U.S.C. § 1330 (§ 2 of the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act of 1976) · 9 U.S.C. § 206 · 9 U.S.C. § 4 · 9 U.S.C. § 5
Relies on At&T Technologies, Inc. v. Communications Workers · Scherk v. Alberto-Culver Co. · Atsa of California, Inc. v. Continental Insurance · Szuts v. Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc. · Avis Rent Car System Inc v. Garage Employees Union Local
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 27 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"Because `arbitration is a matter of contract,' AT T Technologies, Inc. v. Communications Workers of America , 475 U.S. 643 , 648 , 106 S.Ct. 1415 , 1418 , 89 L.Ed.2d 648 (1986), parties may determine by contract the method under which arbitrators for their disputes will be appointed, Universal Reinsurance *Page 668 Corp. v. Allstate Ins. Co. , 16 F.3d 125 , 128 (7th Cir.199[3]); Szuts v. Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc. , 931 F.2d 830 , 831 (11th Cir. 1991); Avis Rent A Car System, Inc. v. Garage Employees Union , 791 F.2d 22 , 24 (2d Cir. 1986); ATSA of California, Inc. v. Continental Ins. Co. , 754 F.2d 1394 , 1395-96 (9th Cir. 1985) (amending original opinion reported at 702 F.2d 172 , 175-76 (9th Cir. 1983)). In fact, the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA), 9 U.S.C. §§ 1 - 16 , expressly states in section 5 that if the parties have provided in their contract `a method of naming or appointing an arbitrator or arbitrators . . ., such method shall be followed.' 9 U.S.C. § 5 ."”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“If in the agreement provision be made for a method of naming or appointing an arbitrator or arbitrators or an umpire, such method shall be followed; but if no method be provided therein, or if a method be provided and any party thereto shall fail to avail himself of such method, or if for any other reason there shall be a lapse in the naming of an arbitrator or arbitrators or umpire, or in filling a vacancy, then upon the application of either party to the controversy the court shall designate and appoint an arbitrator or arbitrators or umpire, as the case may require, who shall act under the said agreement with the same force and effect as if he or they had been specifically named therein; and unless otherwise provided in the agreement the arbitration shall be by a single arbitrator.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“[a]ny dispute ... which may arise in the ... performance of this Contract shall be resolved by arbitral award (decision of arbitrators) chosen by mutual agreement. " Id. at 224 (emphasis added). The parties submitted the case for arbitration. Id. The arbitrating body, the Rice Miller's Association ("RMA”
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.