Ainsworth v. Skurnick’s Empirical Analysis
960 F.2d 939 · 1992
Citation profile
19 federal appellate · 8 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 50 later decisions — most recently September 2020 · most notably Brown v. ITT Consumer Financial Corp. (2000), Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc. v. Jaros (1995)
19 federal appellate · 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)
Relies on Paulussen v. Herion · Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc. v. Bobker · Stroh Container Company v. Delphi Industries Inc Delphi Industries Inc · O.R. Securities, Inc. v. Professional Planning Associates, Inc. · Diapulse Corporation of America v. Carba, Ltd.
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 50 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“An award is arbitrary and capricious only if 'a [legal] ground for the arbitrators decision cannot be inferred from the facts of the case.'”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Industrial Risk Insurers, Barnard & Burk Group, Inc., Barnard and Burk Engineers and Constructors, Inc., Isi, Inc., American Home Assurance Co., Defendants-Third-Party v. M.A.N. Gutehoffnungshutte Gmbh, Third-Party-Defendant-Appellee-Cross-Appellant. Holland & Knight, Mark E. Grantham v. Industrial Risk Insurers, Barnard & Burk Group, Inc., Barnard and Burk Engineers and Constructors, Inc., Isi, Inc., American Home Assurance Co., Defendants-Third-Party · 684 So. 2d 221 - World Invest Corp. v. Breen“[c]ourts are generally prohibited from vacating an arbitration award on the basis of errors of law or interpretation, and the express terms of 9 U.S.C. §§ 10 and 11 have often been deemed the exclusive grounds for vacation or modification.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[t]he cases are unclear as to whether we have ever held that it would be error to vacate an arbitration award as being in manifest disregard of the law.”
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.