Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 335 F.2d 855 - Monte v. Southern Delaware County Authority

Monte v. Southern Delaware County Authority’s Empirical Analysis

335 F.2d 855 · 1964

Citation profile

13
cited by 13 later decisions
3
states following
February 1996
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 1 district · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 13 later decisions — most recently February 1996

1 federal appellate · 1 district · 3 state decisions

601964197019801990decided

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

Relies on Smith v. Westchester County Bar Ass'n · Bower v. Eastern Airlines, Inc. · John Monte and Robert Monte, Trading as John Monte Company v. Southern Delaware County Authority, Southern Delaware County Authority v. John Monte and Robert Monte, Trading as John Monte Company · 212 F. Supp. 604 - Monte v. Southern Delaware County Authority

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

  1. ““It is beyond question that the parties to a contract may agree to submit disputes over that contract to arbitration and may also agree upon a particular tribunal for reviewing the arbitration award. Indeed, as we have noted in another context, an agreement that an arbitration award shall itself be final and binding upon the parties generally precludes judicial review. Bower v. Eastern Airlines, Inc., 214 F.2d 623, 625 (C.A.3), cert. denied, 348 U.S. 871 , 75 S.Ct. 107 , 99 L.Ed. 685 (1954).” (Emphasis ours.)”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““ * * * We need not recite anew our reasons for holding that the par ties in the ease at bar have contractually agreed that review of this award shall be limited to the state courts. We must, however, emphasize our prior determination that this agreement forecloses review in the Federal system.””
    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.