Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 682 F.3d 327 - Dan Ryan Builders, Inc. v. Nelson

Dan Ryan Builders, Inc. v. Nelson’s Empirical Analysis

682 F.3d 327 · 2012

Citation profile

5
cited by 5 later decisions
1
states following
April 2018
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

Relationships

Applies 9 U.S.C. § 1 (Federal Arbitration Act)

Relies on Perry v. Thomas · 132 S. Ct. 1201 - Marmet Health Care Center, Inc. v. Brown · 228 W. Va. 646 - Brown Ex Rel. Brown v. Genesis Healthcare · Cheek v. United Healthcare of the Mid-Atlantic, Inc. · Tillman v. Commercial Credit Loans, Inc.

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

  1. “Does West Virginia law require that an arbitration provision, which appears as a single clause in a multi-clause contract, itself be supported by mutual consideration when the contract as a whole is supported by adequate consideration?”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Any dispute arising under or pursuant to this Agreement, or in any way related to the Property and/or with respect to any claims arising by virtue of any representations alleged to have been made by [Dan Ryan Builders] ... shall be settled and finally determined by arbitration and not in a court of law ... The parties hereto specifically acknowledge that they are and shall be bound by arbitration and are barred from initiating any proceeding or action whatsoever in connection with this Agreement. 1”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “the arbitration provision before us is part of a multi-clause contract between parties who both made certain promises regarding arbitration and other substantive rights.” Dan Ryan Builders, Inc. v. Nelson, 682 F.3d at 329 . We agree with the federal court’s determination that Saylor provides no guidance. . See also, Linda Alle-Murphy,”
    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.