Account information only. It is never shown to the AI client you connect, and it is kept apart from your research — which is not logged at all.
Your token is the key to the MCP: claude.ai custom connectors and ChatGPT developer mode take it in the URL; Claude Code and the rest take it as a bearer header. It is also in your welcome email. Install instructions.
No token yet. One token per address, shown once and mailed to you with setup steps — claude.ai custom connectors and ChatGPT developer mode need it in the URL; Claude Code and the rest take it as a bearer header. Install instructions.
Your MCP token. Anyone holding it can search on your subscription, so keep it off shared screens.
Header form (recommended) — this endpoint, with
Authorization: Bearer <your token>.
URL form — for claude.ai custom connectors and ChatGPT developer mode, which cannot set a header. The whole credential is in the address:
The dedicated fast index: searches run on a machine nobody else queues for, with full-text highlighted excerpts. Higher MCP limits, and semantic search when it lands.
See ProThank you.
Manage billingDelete my account: email [email protected] and it is done by hand, usually the same day. (Self-serve deletion is not built yet.)
Free, and it takes a minute. Registered visitors skip the Cloudflare checks, and your MCP token for Claude or ChatGPT is issued at the end of this.
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.
Here is your MCP token. It is shown once — it is also in the welcome email we just sent you, with setup steps.
Header form (recommended) — this endpoint, with
Authorization: Bearer <your token>.
URL form — for claude.ai custom connectors and ChatGPT developer mode, which cannot set a header. The whole credential is in the address:
That address already had a token, so we did not issue a second one — two live credentials for one mailbox is how people end up with a working laptop and a broken office machine. Your connector URL is in your inbox under “Your Syfert legal research connector URL”; if it is gone, call 904-383-7448.
8 Michigan opinions name it 1 courts 2008–2008 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Michigan courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Mazumder v. University of Michigan Board of Regentsgreen2 sentences2008As the Court of Appeals correctly recognized, the doctrine should be invoked “‘to ensure fundamental practicality and fairness and to prevent the unjust technical forfeiture of a cause of action.’”4 The Court of Appeals persuasively concluded that circumstances justifying its application existed in this case. 1 Waltz v Wyse, 469 Mich 642 (2004). 2 Mazumder v University of Michigan Bd of Regents, 270 Mich App 42, 62 (2006) (citations omitted). 3 480 Mich ___ (2007). 4 Mazumder, 270 Mich App at 61 (citations omitted). 2008As the Court of Appeals correctly recognized, the doctrine should be invoked “‘to ensure fundamental practicality and fairness and to prevent the unjust technical forfeiture of a cause of action.’”4 The Court of Appeals persuasively concluded that circumstances justifying its application existed in this case. 1 Waltz v Wyse, 469 Mich 642 (2004). 2 Mazumder v University of Michigan Bd of Regents, 270 Mich App 42, 62 (2006) (citations omitted). 3 480 Mich ___ (2007). 4 Mazumder, 270 Mich App at 61 (citations omitted). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Michigan. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Waltz v. Wyse
green
2 sentences2008As the Court of Appeals correctly recognized, the doctrine should be invoked “‘to ensure fundamental practicality and fairness and to prevent the unjust technical forfeiture of a cause of action.’”4 The Court of Appeals persuasively concluded that circumstances justifying its application existed in this case. 1 Waltz v Wyse, 469 Mich 642 (2004). 2 Mazumder v University of Michigan Bd of Regents, 270 Mich App 42, 62 (2006) (citations omitted). 3 480 Mich ___ (2007). 4 Mazumder, 270 Mich App at 61 (citations omitted). 2008But, as explained in my statement in Mazumder v Univ of Michigan Bd of Regents,2 given the state of the law when the Court of Appeals rendered its decision, resort to the doctrine of equitable tolling was highly appropriate. 1 Waltz v Wyse, 469 Mich 642 (2004). 2 Mazumder v Univ of Michigan Bd of Regents, ___ Mich ___ (2008). | 8 | 2008–2008 |
Mazumder v. University of Michigan Regents
neutral
2 sentences2008NOTES [1] Waltz v. Wyse, 469 Mich. 642 , 677 N.W.2d 813 (2004). [2] Mazumder v. Univ. of Michigan Bd. of Regents, 480 Mich. ___ , 743 N.W.2d 889 , 2008 WL 271649 (2008). 2008NOTES [1] Waltz v. Wyse, 469 Mich. 642 , 677 N.W.2d 813 (2004). [2] Mazumder v. Univ. of Michigan Bd. of Regents, ___ Mich. ___, 743 N.W.2d 889 , 2008 WL 271649 (2008). | 6 | 2008–2008 |