Dominick Carcich v. Rederi A/b Nordie, and Third-Party v. Cunard Steamship Company, Ltd., Third-Party Luis Calderon v. Den Norske Syd Amerika and Bergen Steamship Company, Det. Bergenske Dampskibsselskab and Den Norske Syd Amerika Linje, Third-Party v. The Cunard Steamship Company, Ltd., Third-Party’s Empirical Analysis
389 F.2d 692 · 1968
Citation profile
64 federal appellate · 10 district · 34 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 200 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently May 2022 · most notably 23 Cal. 3d 180 - Doers v. Golden Gate Bridge, Higway & Transportation District (1979), 31 Cal. 3d 584 - Keating v. Superior Court (1982)
64 federal appellate · 10 district · 34 state decisions — followed in 14 states
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 Baltimore Contractors, Inc. v. Bodinger · Shanferoke Coal Supply Corporation v. Westchester Service Corporation · Robert Lawrence Co. v. Devonshire Fabrics, Inc. · Kulukundis Shipping Co. v. Amtorg Trading Corp. · California Co v. State of Colorado
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 200 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[a]s an abstract exercise in logic it may appear that it is inconsistent for a party to participate in a lawsuit for breach of a contract, and later to ask the court to stay that litigation pending arbitration. Yet the law is clear that such participation, standing alone, does not constitute a waiver.”
11 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[s]ufficient prejudice to infer waiver might be found ... if the party ... took advantage of judicial discovery procedures not available in arbitration.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“A party aggrieved by the alleged failure, neglect, or refusal of another to arbitrate under a written agreement for arbitration, may,petition any United States district court which, save for such agreement, would have jurisdiction under Title 28, in a civil action or in admiralty of the subject matter of a suit arising out of the controversy between the parties, for an order directing that such arbitration proceed in the manner provided for in such agreement .. . upon being satisfied that the making of the agreement for arbitration or the failure to comply therewith is not in issue, the court shall make an order directing the parties to proceed to arbitration in accordance with the terms of the agreement. The hearing and proceedings, under such agreement, shall be within the district in which the petition for an order directing such arbitration is filed, [emphasis added]. 4”
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.