Island Creek Coal Sales Company v. City of Gainesville Florida’s Empirical Analysis
729 F.2d 1046 · 1984
Citation profile
18 federal appellate · 2 district · 8 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 59 later decisions (3 by the Supreme Court) — most recently April 2014 · most notably Stolt-Nielsen S. A. v. AnimalFeeds International Corp. (2010), Cortez Byrd Chips, Inc. v. Bill Harbert Construction Co. (2000)
18 federal appellate · 2 district · 8 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 9 U.S.C. § 10 (Federal Arbitration Act) · 9 U.S.C. § 9
Relies on Gotthelf v. Commissioner · Thompson v. United States · Order of Railway Conductors and Brakemen and Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen v. Clinchfield Railroad Company · Commonwealth Edison Co. v. Gulf Oil Corp. · American Almond Products Co. v. Consolidated Pecan Sales 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 59 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“If the parties in their agreement have agreed that a judgment of the court shall be entered upon the award made pursuant to the arbitration, and shall specify the court, then at any time within one year after the award is made any party to the arbitration may apply to the court so specified for an order confirming the award, and thereupon the court must grant such an order unless the award is vacated, modified, or corrected as prescribed in sections 10 and 11 of this title. If no court is specified in the agreement of the parties, then such application may be made to the United States court in and for the district within which such award was made.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“(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 any other misbehavior by which the rights of any party have been prejudiced; or (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“[t]he interim award disposes of one self-contained issue, namely, whether the City is required to perform the contract during the pendency of the arbitration proceedings.”
2 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.