7 F. Supp. 2d 151 - Sanders v. Gardner’s Empirical Analysis
1998
Citation profile
2 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 18 later decisions — most recently January 2013
2 district · 1 state decisions
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 11 U.S.C. § 362 · 15 U.S.C. § 77T (§ 20 of the Securities Act of 1933) · 15 U.S.C. § 78C (§ 3 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934) · 15 U.S.C. § 78T (§ 20 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934) · 15 U.S.C. § 78U (§ 21 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934) · 9 U.S.C. § 1 (Federal Arbitration Act) · 9 U.S.C. § 10 (Federal Arbitration Act)
Relies on Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital v. Mercury Construction Corp. · Mitsubishi Motors Corporation v. Soler Chrysler-Plymouth Inc Soler Chrysler-Plymouth Inc · First Options of Chicago, Inc. v. Kaplan · United Paperworkers International Union v. Misco, Inc. · BMW of North America, Inc. v. Gore
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 18 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) Where the award was procured by corruption, fraud, or undue means. (2) Where there was evident partiality or corruption in the arbitrators, or either of them. (3) Where the arbitrators were guilty of misconduct in refusing to postpone the hearing, upon sufficient cause shown, or in refusing to hear evidence pertinent and material to the controversy; or of any other misbehavior by which the rights of any party have been prejudiced. (4) 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.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The time and place of the initial hearing shall be determined by the Director of Arbitration and each hearing thereafter by the arbitrators. Notice of the time and place for the initial hearing shall be given at least eight (8) business days prior to the date fixed for the hearing by personal service, registered or certified mail to each of the parties unless the parties shall, by their mutual consent, waive the notice provisions under this Rule. Notice for each hearing thereafter shall be given as the arbitrators may determine. Attendance at a hearing waives notice thereof.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Shamah v. Schweiger“(a) Where there was an evident material miscalculation of figures or an evident material mistake in the description of any person, thing, or property referred to in the award. (b) Where the arbitrators have awarded upon a matter not submitted to them, unless it is a matter not affecting the merits of the decision upon the matter submitted. (c) Where the award is imperfect in matter of form not affecting the merits of the controversy.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Shamah v. Schweiger
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.