Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
3 canonical passages across 3 cases, quoted by 27 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Hoteles Condado Beach, La Concha and Convention Center v. Union De Tronquistas Local 901.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Hoteles Condado Beach, La Concha and Convention Center v. Union De Tronquistas Local 901 Anchor | green | “vacatur is appropriate only when the exclusion of relevant evidence so affects the rights of a party that it may be said that he was deprived of a fair hearing.” | 13 |
| 2 | Teamsters Local Union No. 42 v. Supervalu, Inc. | green | “arbitral awards are nearly impervious to judicial oversight.” | 10 |
| 3 | Doral Financial Corporation v. Garcia-Velez | green | “of course, 10(a)(3) does not require arbitrators to consider every piece of relevant evidence presented to them.” | 4 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.