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.
8 canonical passages across 5 cases, quoted by 152 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 Scherk v. Alberto-Culver Co..
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Scherk v. Alberto-Culver Co. Anchor | green | “to encourage the recognition and enforcement of commercial arbitration agreements in international contracts and to unify the standards by which agreements to arbitrate are observed and arbitral awards are enforced in the signatory countries.” | 36 |
| 2 | Freudensprung v. Offshore Technical Services, Inc. | green | “in determining whether the convention requires compelling arbitration in a given case, courts conduct only a very limited inquiry.” | 25 |
| 3 | Freudensprung v. Offshore Technical Services, Inc. | green | “a court should compel arbitration if (1) there is a written agreement to arbitrate the matter; (2) the agreement provides for arbitration in a convention signatory nation; (3) the agreement arises out of a commercial legal relationship; and (4) a party to the agreement is not an…” | 23 |
| 4 | Grigson v. Creative Artists Agency, L.L.C. | green | “otherwise the arbitration proceedings between the two signatories would be rendered meaningless and the federal policy in favor of arbitration effectively thwarted.” | 14 |
| 5 | Freudensprung v. Offshore Technical Services, Inc. | green | “(1) there is a written agreement to arbitrate the matter; (2) the agreement provides for arbitration in a convention signatory nation; (3) the agreement arises out of a commercial legal relationship; and (4) a party to the agreement is not an american citizen.” | 14 |
| 6 | Acosta v. Master Maintenance & Construction Inc. | green | “federal courts have recognized that the plain and expansive language of the removal statute embodies congress's desire to provide the federal courts with broad jurisdiction over convention act cases in order to ensure reciprocal treatment of arbitration agreements by cosignatori…” | 14 |
| 7 | Grigson v. Creative Artists Agency, L.L.C. | green | “equitable estoppel is warranted when a signatory to the contract containing an arbitration clause raises allegations of substantially interdependent and concerted misconduct by both nonsignatories and one or more of the signatories to the contract.” | 13 |
| 8 | Ge Energy Power Conversion Fr. Sas, Corp. v. Outokumpu Stainless USA, LLC | green | “nothing in the text of the convention could be read to otherwise prohibit the application of domestic equitable estoppel doctrines” | 13 |
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.