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.
6 North Carolina opinions name it 2 courts 1990–2001 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by North Carolina 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 |
|---|---|---|
State v. Swindlergreen2 sentences2000North Carolina's Secretary of Revenue "has adopted the UDITPA approach of defining business income to include both the transactional test and the functional test." Id. 2000North Carolina’s Secretary of Revenue “has adopted the UDITPA approach of defining business income to include both the transactional test and the functional test.” Id. | 1 | 3 |
Polaroid Corp. v. Offermangreen2 sentences1999App. 422 , 496 S.E.2d 399 (Polaroid I), rev’d, 349 N.C. 290 , 507 S.E.2d 284 (Polaroid II) (1998), and as such we applied only the transactional test in determining that the reversion was non-business income. 1999See Polaroid II, 349 N.C. at 301 , 507 S.E.2d at 293 . | 1 | 1 |
Union Carbide Corp. v. Huddlestongreen1 sentence1998See Union Carbide Corp., 854 S.W.2d at 92 . | 1 | 1 |
Phillips Petroleum Co. v. Iowa Department of Revenue & Financegreen1 sentence1998See, e.g., Phillips Petroleum Co. v. Iowa Dep’t of Revenue & Fin., 511 N.W.2d 608 (Iowa 1993); In re Appeal of Chief Indus., 255 Kan. 640 , 875 P.2d 278 ; Federated Stores Realty v. Huddleston, 852 S.W.2d 206 (Tenn. 1992). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Herringgreen2 sentences1996Nonetheless, absent a specific decision to the contrary, we conclude that the stricter “definitional” approach of Weaver remains applicable, see State v. Herring, 322 N.C. 733, 742 , 370 S.E.2d 363, 369 (1988) (citing Weaver, “[i]n determining whether one offense is a lesser included offense of another, we apply a definitional as opposed to a transactional test”), and proceed to an examination of the respective definitions of DWI boating and involuntary manslaughter. 1996Nonetheless, absent a specific decision to the contrary, we conclude that the stricter “definitional” approach of Weaver remains applicable, see State v. Herring, 322 N.C. 733, 742 , 370 S.E.2d 363, 369 (1988) (citing Weaver, “[i]n determining whether one offense is a lesser included offense of another, we apply a definitional as opposed to a transactional test”), and proceed to an examination of the respective definitions of DWI boating and involuntary manslaughter. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in North Carolina. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Polaroid Corp. v. Offerman
green
1 sentence1999App. 422 , 496 S.E.2d 399 (Polaroid I), rev’d, 349 N.C. 290 , 507 S.E.2d 284 (Polaroid II) (1998), and as such we applied only the transactional test in determining that the reversion was non-business income. | 1 | 1999–1999 |
Federated Stores Realty, Inc. v. Huddleston
green
1 sentence1998See, e.g., Phillips Petroleum Co. v. Iowa Dep’t of Revenue & Fin., 511 N.W.2d 608 (Iowa 1993); In re Appeal of Chief Indus., 255 Kan. 640 , 875 P.2d 278 ; Federated Stores Realty v. Huddleston, 852 S.W.2d 206 (Tenn. 1992). | 1 | 1998–1998 |
In Re Tax Appeal of Chief Industries, Inc.
green
2 sentences1998See, e.g., Phillips Petroleum Co. v. Iowa Dep’t of Revenue & Fin., 511 N.W.2d 608 (Iowa 1993); In re Appeal of Chief Indus., 255 Kan. 640 , 875 P.2d 278 ; Federated Stores Realty v. Huddleston, 852 S.W.2d 206 (Tenn. 1992). 1998See, e.g., Phillips Petroleum Co. v. Iowa Dep’t of Revenue & Fin., 511 N.W.2d 608 (Iowa 1993); In re Appeal of Chief Indus., 255 Kan. 640 , 875 P.2d 278 ; Federated Stores Realty v. Huddleston, 852 S.W.2d 206 (Tenn. 1992). | 1 | 1998–1998 |
State v. Williams
green
1 sentence1990State v. Williams, 74 N.C. | 1 | 1990–1990 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.