Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 785 F.2d 59 - Sun Ship, Inc. v. Matson Navigation Co.

Sun Ship, Inc. v. Matson Navigation Co.’s Empirical Analysis

785 F.2d 59 · 1986

Citation profile

83
cited by 83 later decisions
4
states following
March 2018
most recently cited

26 federal appellate · 13 district · 4 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 83 later decisions — most recently March 2018 · most notably Executone Information Systems, Inc. v. Davis (1994), Nagle v. Alspach (1993)

26 federal appellate · 13 district · 4 state decisions

3801986199020002010decided

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 28 U.S.C. § 1927 · 28 U.S.C. § 1961 · 9 U.S.C. § 1 (Federal Arbitration Act) · 9 U.S.C. § 10 (Federal Arbitration Act)

Relies on Prima Paint Corp. v. Flood & Conklin Mfg. Co. · Sloan v. Hicks · Bernhardt v. Polygraphic Co. of America, Inc. · Federal Communications Commission v. League of Women Voters of California · Zaldivar v. City of Los Angeles

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

  1. “'In federal question cases, the rate of prejudgment interest is committed to the discretion of the district court.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “on the merits of the appeal regardless of good or bad faith.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “Even assuming the questions went beyond the arbitration provisions of the contract, 'once the parties have gone beyond their promise to arbitrate and have supplemented the agreement by defining the issue to be submitted to an arbitrator, courts must look both to the contract and to the submission to determine his authority.'”
    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.