Ex Parte Learakos’s Empirical Analysis
2002
Citation profile
4 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 9 U.S.C. § 1 (Federal Arbitration Act) · 9 U.S.C. § 2
Relies on United States v. Lopez · Allied-Bruce Terminix Cos., Inc. v. Dobson · Jim Burke Automotive, Inc. v. Beavers · 748 So. 2d 869 - Rogers Foundation Repair, Inc. v. Powell · 775 So. 2d 759 - Sisters of Visitation v. COCHRAN PLASTERING CO. 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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Likewise, the ostensible transfer of the funds for the plaintiff's $1,000 earnest money payment from the drawee bank in Illinois to the Alabama payee of the check drawn in Alabama does not establish a substantial effect of this real estate sale and purchase on interstate commerce.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“[a] written provision in . . . a contract evidencing a transaction involving commerce . . . shall be valid. . . .”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“"` [T]he record contains no proof that the contract or transaction in this case involved or affected interstate commerce substantially so as to satisfy the interstate-commerce criterion for the applicability of the Federal Arbitration Act [; therefore,] that Act does not apply to this contract or transaction. Rather, Alabama law, and specifically § 8-1-41 (3), Ala. Code 1975, applies to prohibit specific enforcement of "[a]n agreement to submit a controversy to arbitration ."'"”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.