green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 1×
4.2 score
“it is well-established that courts should play only a limited role in reviewing the decisions of arbitrators.”
Treatment trajectory · 2000 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2000
2013
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 7 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
General Elec. Co. v. Anson Stamping Co. Inc.
it is well-established that courts should play only a limited role in reviewing the decisions of arbitrators.
discussed
Cited "see"
Lattimore v. Dubois
See United States v. Marcello, 212 F.3d 1005, 1010 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 878 , 121 S.Ct. 188 , 148 L.Ed.2d 130 (2000) (denying a § 2255 motion filed one day late because of confusion over the applicable deadline).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Pedro Luis Christopher Tinoco
See United States v. Prather, 205 F.3d 1265, 1269 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 879 , 121 S.Ct. 188 , 148 L.Ed.2d 130 (2000). (“In interpreting the meaning of a statute, it is axiomatic that a court must begin with the plain language of the statute.”).
discussed
Cited "see"
Kenneth J. Lloyd v. John R. Vannatta
See United States v. Marcello, 212 F.3d 1005, 1008 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 878 , 121 S.Ct. 188 , 148 L.Ed.2d 130 (2000); Ramunno v. United States, 264 F.3d 723, 725 (7th Cir.2001) (government must bring alleged defect in CA to this court's attention "early in the process”).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Steven Curtis McIntosh
See 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (l)-(4) (absent impediment created by governmental action, newly recognized right, or newly discovered facts, one-year period of limitation runs from date on which judgment of conviction becomes final); Sweet v. Delo, 125 F.3d 1144, 1155 (8th Cir.1997) (Supreme Court’s denial of certiorari fixes point of finality of conviction), cert. denied, 523 U.S. 1010 , 118 S.Ct. 1197 , 140 L.Ed.2d 326 (1998); see also United States v. Marcello, 212 F.3d 1005, 1008 (7th Cir.) (conviction became final, thus triggering one-year limitations period for § 2255 motion, on date Supreme C…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
LILLIAN PEBBLES MORRISON v. CIRCUIT CITY STORES, INC., MARK F. SHANKLE, SR. v. PEP BOYS — MANNY, MOE & JACK, INC.
(2×)
See, e.g., Dawahare v. Spencer, 210 F.3d 666, 669 (6th Cir.) (noting the “manifest disregard of the law” standard of review for arbitration awards and also noting that review is made even more difficult where arbitrators do not explain their decisions), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 878 , 121 S.Ct. 187 , 148 L.Ed.2d 130 (2000); Glennon v. Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc., 83 F.3d 132, 136 (6th Cir.1996) (discussing the standard for vacating an arbitration award based on “manifest disregard of the law” standard).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Reynolds v. Cambra
See also United States v. Marcello, 212 F.3d 1005, 1009 (7th Cir.) (adopting the “anniversary rule” and holding that “[t]he first day of the 1-year limitation period is the day after the Supreme Court denies certiorari, giving defendants until the close of business on the anniversary date of the certiorari denial to file their habe-as motion.”), cert. denied, -U.S.-, 121 S.Ct. 188 , 148 L.Ed.2d 130 (2000).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Brown
v.
Adidas USA, Inc., aka Adidas America, Inc.
v.
Adidas USA, Inc., aka Adidas America, Inc.
No. 00-158.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Oct 2, 2000.
Published
Citer courts: W.D. Kentucky (1)
C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.