Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 367 F.2d 733 - Butler Products Company, an Illinois Corporation, George W. Butler and Gladys A. Butler v. Unistrut Corporation, a Michigan Corporation

Butler Products Company, an Illinois Corporation, George W. Butler and Gladys A. Butler v. Unistrut Corporation, a Michigan Corporation’s Empirical Analysis

367 F.2d 733 · 1966

Citation profile

51
cited by 51 later decisions
7
states following
June 2011
most recently cited

22 federal appellate · 10 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 51 later decisions — most recently June 2011 · most notably Northern Illinois Gas Company v. Airco Industrial Gases a Division of Airco Inc (1982), Davis v. Chevy Chase Financial Ltd. (1981)

22 federal appellate · 10 state decisions

180196619701980199020002010decided

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 United Steelworkers v. Warrior & Gulf Navigation Co. · United Steelworkers of America v. Enterprise Wheel and Car Corp · United Steelworkers v. American Manufacturing Co. · Atkinson v. Sinclair Refining Co. · 68 Ill. App. 2d 145 - School District No. 46 v. Del Bianco

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

  1. “federal and Illinois authorities are in accord in this field,”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “well settled that arbitration is a matter of contract, and a party cannot be required to arbitrate any dispute which he has not agreed to arbitrate.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “the items in dispute shall be submitted for determination to the firm of Peat, Marwick, Mitchell & Co.”
    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.