BDO Seidman v. Miller’s Empirical Analysis
1997
Citation profile
12 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently June 2016
12 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
Relies on Volt Information Sciences Inc v. Board of Trustees of Leland Stanford Junior University · Garza v. Alviar · Jack B. Anglin Co., Inc. v. Tipps · Pepe International Development Co. v. Pub Brewing Co. · Hearthshire Braeswood Plaza Ltd. Partners v. Bill Kelly 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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“no party to a contract, or someone so identified with the party as to be in fact, even though not in name, the party, can be designated as an arbitrator to decide disputes under it. Apart from outraging public policy, such an agreement is illusory; for while in form it provides for arbitration, in substance it yields the power to an adverse party to decide disputes under the contract.”
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.