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.
5 Colorado opinions name it 2 courts 1990–2014 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Colorado 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 |
|---|---|---|
Atchison v. City of Englewoodgreen1 sentence2014Id. at 306, 463 P.2d at 302 (noting debate and arguments by the American Law of Property at the time that "the rule should not apply and that non-application is the modern trend"). 138 A decade later in Perry, we omitted any discussion of the rule against unreasonable restraints, and citing to Atchison, summarily stated that the rule against perpetuit-ies "applies to both options and preemptive rights, whether in the grantor or third persons." 200 Colo. at 284 , 614 P.2d at 366 . | 1 | 1 |
The Merchants National Bank of Mobile v. Robert H. Ching, Jr., Etc.green1 sentence2014Nat'l Bank of Mobile v. Ching, 681 F.2d 1383, 1387 (11th Cir.1982) (implicitly rejecting the notion that a claim for quantum meruit or an implied contract for work performed could be classified as an account; but, determining that certain funds awarded for work that had to be redone-funds that would otherwise be classified as general intangibles were actually proceeds of an account because the debtor and its customer had expressly agreed that debtor had a right to be paid for that additional work)}. | 1 | 1 |
Schieffer v. Catholic Archdiocese of Omahagreen2 sentences1995See Schieffer v. Catholic Archdiocese, 244 Neb. 715 , 508 N.W.2d 907 (1993); Bladen v. First Presbyterian Church, 857 P.2d 789 (Okla.1993); Byrd v. Faber, 57 Ohio St.3d 56 , 565 N.E.2d 584 (1991); Strock v. Pressnell, 38 Ohio St.3d 207 , 527 N.E.2d 1235 (1988); Christofferson v. Church of Scientology, Inc., supra ; Schmidt v. Bishop, 779 F.Supp. 321 (S.D.N.Y.1991); Jones v. Trane, 153 Misc.2d 822 , 591 N.Y.S.2d 927 (1992). 1995See Schieffer v. Catholic Archdiocese, 244 Neb. 715 , 508 N.W.2d 907 (1993); Bladen v. First Presbyterian Church, 857 P.2d 789 (Okla.1993); Byrd v. Faber, 57 Ohio St.3d 56 , 565 N.E.2d 584 (1991); Strock v. Pressnell, 38 Ohio St.3d 207 , 527 N.E.2d 1235 (1988); Christofferson v. Church of Scientology, Inc., supra ; Schmidt v. Bishop, 779 F.Supp. 321 (S.D.N.Y.1991); Jones v. Trane, 153 Misc.2d 822 , 591 N.Y.S.2d 927 (1992). | 1 | 1 |
Legare v. Stategreen2 sentences1990The defendant cites a number of cases in support of the notion that the instruction "improperly undermined the jury's ability to consider fully the defendant's mitigating evidence." Parks v. Brown, 860 F.2d 1545 (10th Cir.1988), rev'd sub nom., Saffle v. Parks, ___ U.S. ___, 110 S.Ct. 1257 , 108 L.Ed.2d 415 (1990); see also Legare v. State, 250 Ga. 875 , 302 S.E.2d 351 (1983) (anti-sympathy penalty phase instruction may confuse jury as to its option to recommend mercy). 1990The defendant cites a number of cases in support of the notion that the instruction "improperly undermined the jury's ability to consider fully the defendant's mitigating evidence." Parks v. Brown, 860 F.2d 1545 (10th Cir.1988), rev'd sub nom., Saffle v. Parks, ___ U.S. ___, 110 S.Ct. 1257 , 108 L.Ed.2d 415 (1990); see also Legare v. State, 250 Ga. 875 , 302 S.E.2d 351 (1983) (anti-sympathy penalty phase instruction may confuse jury as to its option to recommend mercy). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Colorado. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Perry v. Brundage
green
2 sentences2014Id. at 306, 463 P.2d at 302 (noting debate and arguments by the American Law of Property at the time that "the rule should not apply and that non-application is the modern trend"). 138 A decade later in Perry, we omitted any discussion of the rule against unreasonable restraints, and citing to Atchison, summarily stated that the rule against perpetuit-ies "applies to both options and preemptive rights, whether in the grantor or third persons." 200 Colo. at 284 , 614 P.2d at 366 . 2014Id. at 306, 463 P.2d at 302 (noting debate and arguments by the American Law of Property at the time that "the rule should not apply and that non-application is the modern trend"). 138 A decade later in Perry, we omitted any discussion of the rule against unreasonable restraints, and citing to Atchison, summarily stated that the rule against perpetuit-ies "applies to both options and preemptive rights, whether in the grantor or third persons." 200 Colo. at 284 , 614 P.2d at 366 . | 1 | 2014–2014 |
Mauro v. Tracy
green
2 sentences2005We first acknowledged the notion of waiver in Mauro v. Tracy, 152 Colo. 106 , 380 P.2d 570 (1963), where the plaintiff in a personal injury lawsuit testified about the details of treatment provided by two physicians. 2005We first acknowledged the notion of waiver in Mauro v. Tracy, 152 Colo. 106 , 380 P.2d 570 (1963), where the plaintiff in a personal injury lawsuit testified about the details of treatment provided by two physicians. | 1 | 2005–2005 |
Bladen v. First Presbyterian Church of Sallisaw
green
2 sentences1995See Schieffer v. Catholic Archdiocese, 244 Neb. 715 , 508 N.W.2d 907 (1993); Bladen v. First Presbyterian Church, 857 P.2d 789 (Okla.1993); Byrd v. Faber, 57 Ohio St.3d 56 , 565 N.E.2d 584 (1991); Strock v. Pressnell, 38 Ohio St.3d 207 , 527 N.E.2d 1235 (1988); Christofferson v. Church of Scientology, Inc., supra; Schmidt v. Bishop, 779 F.Supp. 321 (S.D.N.Y.1991); Jones v. Trane, 153 Misc.2d 822 , 591 N.Y.S.2d 927 (1992). 1995See Schieffer v. Catholic Archdiocese, 244 Neb. 715 , 508 N.W.2d 907 (1993); Bladen v. First Presbyterian Church, 857 P.2d 789 (Okla.1993); Byrd v. Faber, 57 Ohio St.3d 56 , 565 N.E.2d 584 (1991); Strock v. Pressnell, 38 Ohio St.3d 207 , 527 N.E.2d 1235 (1988); Christofferson v. Church of Scientology, Inc., supra ; Schmidt v. Bishop, 779 F.Supp. 321 (S.D.N.Y.1991); Jones v. Trane, 153 Misc.2d 822 , 591 N.Y.S.2d 927 (1992). | 1 | 1995–1995 |
Jones v. Trane
green
2 sentences1995See Schieffer v. Catholic Archdiocese, 244 Neb. 715 , 508 N.W.2d 907 (1993); Bladen v. First Presbyterian Church, 857 P.2d 789 (Okla.1993); Byrd v. Faber, 57 Ohio St.3d 56 , 565 N.E.2d 584 (1991); Strock v. Pressnell, 38 Ohio St.3d 207 , 527 N.E.2d 1235 (1988); Christofferson v. Church of Scientology, Inc., supra ; Schmidt v. Bishop, 779 F.Supp. 321 (S.D.N.Y.1991); Jones v. Trane, 153 Misc.2d 822 , 591 N.Y.S.2d 927 (1992). 1995See Schieffer v. Catholic Archdiocese, 244 Neb. 715 , 508 N.W.2d 907 (1993); Bladen v. First Presbyterian Church, 857 P.2d 789 (Okla.1993); Byrd v. Faber, 57 Ohio St.3d 56 , 565 N.E.2d 584 (1991); Strock v. Pressnell, 38 Ohio St.3d 207 , 527 N.E.2d 1235 (1988); Christofferson v. Church of Scientology, Inc., supra ; Schmidt v. Bishop, 779 F.Supp. 321 (S.D.N.Y.1991); Jones v. Trane, 153 Misc.2d 822 , 591 N.Y.S.2d 927 (1992). | 1 | 1995–1995 |
Schmidt v. Bishop
green
2 sentences1995See Schieffer v. Catholic Archdiocese, 244 Neb. 715 , 508 N.W.2d 907 (1993); Bladen v. First Presbyterian Church, 857 P.2d 789 (Okla.1993); Byrd v. Faber, 57 Ohio St.3d 56 , 565 N.E.2d 584 (1991); Strock v. Pressnell, 38 Ohio St.3d 207 , 527 N.E.2d 1235 (1988); Christofferson v. Church of Scientology, Inc., supra; Schmidt v. Bishop, 779 F.Supp. 321 (S.D.N.Y.1991); Jones v. Trane, 153 Misc.2d 822 , 591 N.Y.S.2d 927 (1992). 1995See Schieffer v. Catholic Archdiocese, 244 Neb. 715 , 508 N.W.2d 907 (1993); Bladen v. First Presbyterian Church, 857 P.2d 789 (Okla.1993); Byrd v. Faber, 57 Ohio St.3d 56 , 565 N.E.2d 584 (1991); Strock v. Pressnell, 38 Ohio St.3d 207 , 527 N.E.2d 1235 (1988); Christofferson v. Church of Scientology, Inc., supra ; Schmidt v. Bishop, 779 F.Supp. 321 (S.D.N.Y.1991); Jones v. Trane, 153 Misc.2d 822 , 591 N.Y.S.2d 927 (1992). | 1 | 1995–1995 |
Strock v. Pressnell
green
2 sentences1995See Schieffer v. Catholic Archdiocese, 244 Neb. 715 , 508 N.W.2d 907 (1993); Bladen v. First Presbyterian Church, 857 P.2d 789 (Okla.1993); Byrd v. Faber, 57 Ohio St.3d 56 , 565 N.E.2d 584 (1991); Strock v. Pressnell, 38 Ohio St.3d 207 , 527 N.E.2d 1235 (1988); Christofferson v. Church of Scientology, Inc., supra ; Schmidt v. Bishop, 779 F.Supp. 321 (S.D.N.Y.1991); Jones v. Trane, 153 Misc.2d 822 , 591 N.Y.S.2d 927 (1992). 1995See Schieffer v. Catholic Archdiocese, 244 Neb. 715 , 508 N.W.2d 907 (1993); Bladen v. First Presbyterian Church, 857 P.2d 789 (Okla.1993); Byrd v. Faber, 57 Ohio St.3d 56 , 565 N.E.2d 584 (1991); Strock v. Pressnell, 38 Ohio St.3d 207 , 527 N.E.2d 1235 (1988); Christofferson v. Church of Scientology, Inc., supra ; Schmidt v. Bishop, 779 F.Supp. 321 (S.D.N.Y.1991); Jones v. Trane, 153 Misc.2d 822 , 591 N.Y.S.2d 927 (1992). | 1 | 1995–1995 |
Byrd v. Faber
green
2 sentences1995See Schieffer v. Catholic Archdiocese, 244 Neb. 715 , 508 N.W.2d 907 (1993); Bladen v. First Presbyterian Church, 857 P.2d 789 (Okla.1993); Byrd v. Faber, 57 Ohio St.3d 56 , 565 N.E.2d 584 (1991); Strock v. Pressnell, 38 Ohio St.3d 207 , 527 N.E.2d 1235 (1988); Christofferson v. Church of Scientology, Inc., supra ; Schmidt v. Bishop, 779 F.Supp. 321 (S.D.N.Y.1991); Jones v. Trane, 153 Misc.2d 822 , 591 N.Y.S.2d 927 (1992). 1995See Schieffer v. Catholic Archdiocese, 244 Neb. 715 , 508 N.W.2d 907 (1993); Bladen v. First Presbyterian Church, 857 P.2d 789 (Okla.1993); Byrd v. Faber, 57 Ohio St.3d 56 , 565 N.E.2d 584 (1991); Strock v. Pressnell, 38 Ohio St.3d 207 , 527 N.E.2d 1235 (1988); Christofferson v. Church of Scientology, Inc., supra ; Schmidt v. Bishop, 779 F.Supp. 321 (S.D.N.Y.1991); Jones v. Trane, 153 Misc.2d 822 , 591 N.Y.S.2d 927 (1992). | 1 | 1995–1995 |
Saffle v. Parks
green
2 sentences1990The defendant cites a number of cases in support of the notion that the instruction "improperly undermined the jury's ability to consider fully the defendant's mitigating evidence." Parks v. Brown, 860 F.2d 1545 (10th Cir.1988), rev'd sub nom., Saffle v. Parks, ___ U.S. ___, 110 S.Ct. 1257 , 108 L.Ed.2d 415 (1990); see also Legare v. State, 250 Ga. 875 , 302 S.E.2d 351 (1983) (anti-sympathy penalty phase instruction may confuse jury as to its option to recommend mercy). 1990The defendant cites a number of cases in support of the notion that the instruction "improperly undermined the jury's ability to consider fully the defendant's mitigating evidence." Parks v. Brown, 860 F.2d 1545 (10th Cir.1988), rev'd sub nom., Saffle v. Parks, ___ U.S. ___, 110 S.Ct. 1257 , 108 L.Ed.2d 415 (1990); see also Legare v. State, 250 Ga. 875 , 302 S.E.2d 351 (1983) (anti-sympathy penalty phase instruction may confuse jury as to its option to recommend mercy). | 1 | 1990–1990 |
Brock v. Shirk
green
2 sentences1990The defendant cites a number of cases in support of the notion that the instruction “improperly undermined the jury’s ability to consider fully the defendant’s mitigating evidence.” Parks v. Brown, 860 F.2d 1545 (10th Cir.1988), rev’d sub nom., Saffle v. Parks, — U.S. -, 110 S.Ct. 1257 , 108 L.Ed.2d 415 (1990); see also Legare v. State, 250 Ga. 875 , 302 S.E.2d 351 (1983) (anti-sympathy penalty phase instruction may confuse jury as to its option to recommend mercy). 1990The defendant cites a number of cases in support of the notion that the instruction "improperly undermined the jury's ability to consider fully the defendant's mitigating evidence." Parks v. Brown, 860 F.2d 1545 (10th Cir.1988), rev'd sub nom., Saffle v. Parks, ___ U.S. ___, 110 S.Ct. 1257 , 108 L.Ed.2d 415 (1990); see also Legare v. State, 250 Ga. 875 , 302 S.E.2d 351 (1983) (anti-sympathy penalty phase instruction may confuse jury as to its option to recommend mercy). | 1 | 1990–1990 |
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.