Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 70 F.3d 418 - Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc. v. Jaros

Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc. v. Jaros’s Empirical Analysis

70 F.3d 418 · 1995

Citation profile

111
cited by 111 later decisions
8
states following
January 2023
most recently cited

32 federal appellate · 2 district · 18 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 111 later decisions — most recently January 2023 · most notably Cole v. Burns International Security Services, Cole v. Burns Intrenational Security Services (1997)

32 federal appellate · 2 district · 18 state decisions

6301995200020102020decided

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 15 U.S.C. § 78J (§ 10 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934) · 9 U.S.C. § 10 (Federal Arbitration Act)

Relies on First Options of Chicago, Inc. v. Kaplan · Wilko v. Swan · Lampf, Pleva, Lipkind, Prupis & Petigrow v. Gilbertson · Spencer Gifts, Inc. v. Olitsky · Bryson Properties, XVIII v. Travelers Insurance Co.

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

  1. “(1) the applicable legal principle is clearly defined and not subject to reasonable debate; and (2) the arbitrators refused to heed that legal principle.”
    17 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “argument that is legally persuasive and supports the award,”
    10 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “where the arbitrators exceeded their powers.”
    6 later decisions 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.