Walton’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

3 district · 15 state decisions

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.

1. “there is still no evidence that Congress intended binding arbitration to be considered an informal dispute settlement procedure. Therefore the fact that any informal dispute settlement procedure must be non-binding, does not imply that Congress meant to preclude binding arbitration, which is of a different nature.”

   5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Daimler Chrysler Corp. v. Yaeger · 209 Ill. 2d 376 - Borowiec v. GATEWAY 2000, INC.

2. ““We do not see any inherent conflict between arbitration and these purposes. Consumers can still vindicate their rights under warranties in an arbitral forum. Warranties can provide adequate and truthful information to consumers, while also requiring binding arbitration. Arbitration is not inherently unfair to consumers. See Allied-Bruce Terminix Cos. v. Dobson, 513 U.S. 265, 280 , 115 S. Ct. 834 , 130 L. Ed. 2d 753 (1995) (‘Congress, when enacting the [FAA], had the needs of consumers ... in mind.’) Although the legislative history of the MMWA expresses a concern with the unequal bargaining power of consumers, see S. Rep. No. 93 — 151, at 22-23 (1973), a perception of unequal bargaining power is not enough to unilaterally hold arbitration agreements unenforceable. See Gilmer, 500 U.S. at 33 , 111 S. Ct. 1647 . Of course, courts can consider individual claims of fraud or unconscionability in arbitration agreements as they would in any other contract. See id. We thus can find no inherent conflict between the MMWA and the FAA.” Walton, 298 F.3d at 478 .”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 257 Mich. App. 513 - Abela v. General Motors Corp. · 209 Ill. 2d 376 - Borowiec v. GATEWAY 2000, INC.

3. “A written provision in any ... contract evidencing a transaction involving commerce to settle by arbitration a controversy thereafter arising out of such contract or transaction, or the refusal to perform the whole or any part thereof, or an agreement in writing to submit to arbitration an existing controversy arising out of such a contract, ... shall be valid, irrevocable, and enforceable, save upon such grounds as exist at law or in equity for the revocation of any contract.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Krol v. FCA US, LLC · Michael Shane Davis v. Southern Energy