Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 500 F.2d 424 - I/S Stavborg v. National Metal Converters, Inc.

I/S Stavborg v. National Metal Converters, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis

500 F.2d 424 · 1974

Citation profile

153
cited by 153 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
13
states following
April 2023
most recently cited

52 federal appellate · 8 district · 16 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 153 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently April 2023 · most notably Hall Street Associates, L. L. C. v. Mattel, Inc. (2008), Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc. v. Bobker (1986)

52 federal appellate · 8 district · 16 state decisions — followed in 13 states

580197419801990200020102020decided

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. American Manufacturing Co. · Wilko v. Swan · Bernhardt v. Polygraphic Co. of America, Inc. · First National City Bank v. Banco Nacional de Cuba · Seaboard Shipping Corp. v. Moran Inland Waterways 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 153 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “(a) Where the award was procured by corruption, fraud, or undue means. (b) Where there was evident partiality or corruption in the arbitrators . . . (c) Where the arbitrators were guilty of misconduct in refusing to postpone the hearing . or . hear evidence . (d) Where the arbitrators exceeded their powers, or so imperfectly executed them that a mutual, final, and definite award upon the subject matter submitted was not made.”
    8 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  2. “"It does not follow however that simply because the contract in issue involves interstate commerce, a federal court has jurisdiction to confirm the award and enter judgment. The Act provides that confirmation of an arbitration award is appropriate only where the parties `in their agreement have agreed that a judgment of the court shall be entered upon the award . . .' 9 U.S.C. § 9 . There was no such explicit agreement here but only a clause providing for the settlement of controversies by arbitration pursuant to the rules of the American Arbitration Association."”
    6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “(w)hatever arbitrators' mistakes of law may be corrected, simple misinterpretations of contracts do not appear one of them.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent

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.