Second Circuit· 8/24/1995
Thomson-Csf, S.A. v. American Arbitration Association, Evans & Sutherland Computer Corporation
Citations
- 64 F.3d 773
- 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 24146
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- holding that a non-signatory party may be subject to an arbitration agreement if her subsequent conduct indicates that she has assumed the obligation to arbitrate
- holding that although the unwilling party received a benefit, the benefit did not derive directly from the agreement containing the arbitration clause and thus arbitration could not be compelled
- holding that five theories, based in common law and agency 14 principles, justify binding nonsignatories to arbitration agreements: “1
- holding that although the unwilling party received a benefit, the benefit did not derive directly from the agreement containing the arbitration clause and thus arbitration could not be compelled
- holding that district court “improperly extended the limited theories upon which this Court is willing to enforce an arbitration agreement against a nonsignatory” by applying alternate estoppel theory when signatory sought to compel arbitration
- holding that an “indirect benefit” not derived from the agreement itself containing the arbitration clause, is “not the sort of benefit which this [c]ourt envisioned as the basis for estop- ping a nonsignatory from avoiding arbitration”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Meskill, Altimari, Calabresi
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
394 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- In Re Kellogg Brown & Root, Inc.Texas Supreme Court· 2005-05-20· cited 1,006×
- Grigson v. Creative Artists Agency, L.L.C.Fifth Circuit· 2000-04-24· cited 511×
- Kevin Nguyen v. Barnes & Noble Inc.Ninth Circuit· 2014-08-18· cited 420×
- Bridas S.A.P.I.C. v. Government of TurkmenistanFifth Circuit· 2003-09-15· cited 352×
- International Paper Company v. Schwabedissen Maschinen & Anlagen GmbhFourth Circuit· 2000-03-14· cited 327×
- E.I. DuPont de Nemours and Co. v. Rhone Poulenc Fiber and Resin Intermediates, S.A.S.Third Circuit· 2001-10-15· cited 324×
- Intergen N v. v. GrinaFirst Circuit· 2003-09-22· cited 309×
- Javitch v. First Union Securities, Inc.First Circuit· 2003-01-10· cited 282×
- In Re Merrill Lynch Trust Co. FSBTexas Supreme Court· 2007-08-24· cited 273×
- Washington Mutual Finance Group, LLC v. BaileyFifth Circuit· 2004-03-19· cited 263×
- Bel-Ray Company, Inc. v. Chemrite (Pty) Ltd.Third Circuit· 1999-06-28· cited 255×
- Mag Portfolio Consult, Gmbh v. Merlin Biomed Group LLC and Merlin Biomed Advisors LLCSecond Circuit· 2001-10-10· cited 209×
- Tracinda Corp. v. Daimlerchrysler AgThird Circuit· 2007-09-18· cited 206×
- Jody James Farms, Jv v. the Altman Group, Inc. and Laurie DiazTexas Supreme Court· 2018-05-11· cited 192×
- Kevin Comer v. Micor, Inc. Kenneth C. Smith Elliot H. Wagner Barbara Arbucci, and Salomon Smith Barney, Inc.Ninth Circuit· 2006-02-01· cited 189×
- Worldcrisa Corporation and Crisa Corporation v. Patrick J. ArmstrongSecond Circuit· 1997-10-16· cited 186×
- Zurich American Insurance Company v. Watts IndustriesSeventh Circuit· 2005-08-02· cited 170×
- De Jesus v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.Second Circuit· 1996-06-25· cited 165×
- In the Matter of the Arbitration Between Monegasque De Reassurances S.A.M. (Monde Re) v. Nak Naftogaz of Ukraine and State of UkraineSecond Circuit· 2002-11-15· cited 144×
- Merrill Lynch Investment Managers v. Optibase, Ltd.Second Circuit· 2003-07-18· cited 144×
Cites
19 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- United Steelworkers v. Warrior & Gulf Navigation Co.Supreme Court· 1960-06-20· cited 5,791×
- Mitsubishi Motors Corp. v. Soler Chrysler-Plymouth, Inc.Supreme Court· 1985-07-02· cited 3,702×
- Sunkist Soft Drinks, Inc., Del Monte Corporation, Nabisco Brands, Inc. v. Sunkist Growers, Inc.Eleventh Circuit· 1993-12-30· cited 252×
- Fisser v. International BankSecond Circuit· 1960-08-01· cited 160×
- American Protein Corporation v. Ab Volvo and Volvo Lastvagnar Ab, as Successors in Interest to Beijerinvest Ab, Beijer Industries, Inc. And Bo LyckeSecond Circuit· 1988-04-08· cited 155×
- McBro Planning and Development Company and McCarthy Brothers Company, a Joint Venture v. Triangle Electrical Construction Company, Inc.Eleventh Circuit· 1984-09-06· cited 144×
- J.J. Ryan & Sons, Inc. v. Rhone Poulenc Textile, S.A.Fourth Circuit· 1988-12-13· cited 143×
- Walter E. Heller & Co. v. Video Innovations, Inc.Second Circuit· 1984-02-29· cited 105×
- Mcallister Brothers, Inc. v. A & S Transportation Co.Second Circuit· 1980-05-02· cited 103×
- Deloitte Noraudit A/S v. Deloitte Haskins & Sells, U.S.Second Circuit· 1993-11-22· cited 101×
- In the Matter of the Arbitration Between Interbras Cayman Co. v. Orient Victory Shipping Co., S.A.Second Circuit· 1981-11-02· cited 66×
- A/s Custodia v. Lessin International, Inc.Second Circuit· 1974-06-10· cited 51×
- In the Matter of Arbitration Between Import Export Steel Corporation and Nimpex International, Inc. v. Mississippi Valley Barge Line CompanySecond Circuit· 1965-10-26· cited 50×
- Gvozdenovic v. United Air Lines, Inc.Second Circuit· 1991-05-22· cited 35×
- Gregory v. Frontier Materials, Inc.Supreme Court· 1991-10-15· cited 33×
- In Re the Arbitration Between Continental U.K. Ltd. & Anagel Confidence Compania Naviera, S.A.S.D. New York· 1987-04-27· cited 24×
- Matter of Arbitration Between Keystone Shipping Co. & Texport Oil, Co.S.D. New York· 1992-01-27· cited 17×
- Petition of Transrol Navegacao SAS.D. New York· 1991-12-11· cited 10×
- Lumbermens Mutual Casualty Co. v. S-W Industries, Inc.Supreme Court· 1994-10-03· cited 2×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.