Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 673 FSUPP 85 - Dighello v. Busconi

Dighello v. Busconi’s Empirical Analysis

1987

Citation profile

23
cited by 23 later decisions
1
states following
April 2019
most recently cited

12 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 23 later decisions — most recently April 2019

12 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions

1501987199020002010decided

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

Applies 9 U.S.C. § 10 (Federal Arbitration Act) · 9 U.S.C. § 2

Relies on Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital v. Mercury Construction Corp. · United Steelworkers v. Warrior & Gulf Navigation Co. · United Steelworkers of America v. Enterprise Wheel and Car Corp · Raphan v. United States · Glidden Company v. Zdanok Et Al.

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

  1. “no further litigation is necessary to finalize the obligations of the parties under the award,”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “[I]f an arbitration panel rules on issues not presented to it by the parties, it has exceeded its authority and the award must be vacated. However, Congress has indicated a strong preference for enforcing arbitration agreements, and it is well settled that a reviewing court’s power to vacate an award is severely limited so that an award may be set aside only under the very narrow circumstances enumerated in § 10, or if it is “irrational” or “manifestly disregards the law.” In determining whether an arbitration agreement covers a particular issue, all doubts must be resolved in favor of arbitration. Any issue that is “inextricably tied up with the merits of the underlying dispute” may properly be decided by the arbitrator.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “clear enough to indicate what each party [was] required to do,”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.