Sweeney v. Morganroth’s Empirical Analysis
1978
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 9 U.S.C. § 10 (Federal Arbitration Act)
Relies on Wilko v. Swan · Topsy's International, Inc. v. Seiffer · Garrity v. Lyle Stuart, Inc. · Baldonado v. California · Amicizia Societa Navegazione v. Chilean Nitrate & Iodine Sales Corp.
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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Even assuming that the award is a penalty — no small assumption under either state or federal law — where, as here the contract expressly provides the arbitrator with the power to grant the award, and recognizing the substantial leeway which must be granted an arbitrator in fashioning remedies ..., the award seems wholly consistent with the prevailing law, both state and federal; it certainly does not evidence manifest disregard therefor.”
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.