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.
21 canonical passages across 19 cases, quoted by 10,421 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 Rovilma Diamond v. Colonial Life & Accident Insurance Company.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Rovilma Diamond v. Colonial Life & Accident Insurance Company Anchor | green | “in the absence of a timely filed objection, a district court need not conduct a de novo review, but instead must 'only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation.” | 6,841 |
| 2 | Link v. Wabash Railroad | green | “to manage their own affairs so as to achieve the orderly and expeditious disposition of cases.” | 1,544 |
| 3 | Chambers v. Nasco, Inc. | green | “because of their very potency, inherent powers must be exercised with restraint and discretion.” | 342 |
| 4 | Chambers v. Nasco, Inc. | green | “a primary aspect of that discretion is the ability to fashion an appropriate sanction for conduct which abuses the judicial process.” | 290 |
| 5 | Quintin Orpiano v. Gene M. Johnson, Warden W. P. Rodgers, Asst. Warden (Security) R. A. Clendenen Correctional Corporal | green | “when objections to strictly legal issues are raised and no factual issues are challenged, de novo review of the record may be dispensed with.” | 259 |
| 6 | Philips v. Pitt County Memorial Hospital | green | “may properly take judicial notice of matters of public record” | 205 |
| 7 | Resolution Trust Corp. v. Hallmark Builders, Inc. | green | “when the magistrate provides such notice and a party still fails to object to the findings of fact and those findings are adopted by the district court the party may not challenge them on appeal in the absence of plain error or manifest injustice.” | 198 |
| 8 | Field v. McMaster | green | “in the absence of specific objections . . . this court is not required to give any explanation for adopting the recommendation.” | 172 |
| 9 | Rehberg v. Paulk | green | “creates a private right of action to vindicate violations of 'rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the constitution and laws' of the united states.” | 131 |
| 10 | Ballard v. Carlson | green | “the federal rules of civil procedure recognize that courts must have the authority to control litigation before them, and this authority includes the power to order dismissal of an action for failure to comply with court orders.” | 67 |
| 11 | JoAnn Britt v. Louis DeJoy | green | “when a district court dismisses a complaint or all claims without providing leave to amend . . . the order dismissing the complaint is final and appealable” | 65 |
| 12 | Gloria W. DOWE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. TOTAL ACTION AGAINST POVERTY IN ROANOKE VALLEY, Defendant-Appellee | red | “since, by definition, an employer cannot take action because of a factor of which it is unaware, the employer's knowledge that the plaintiff engaged in a protected activity is absolutely necessary to establish the third element of the prima facie case.” | 58 |
| 13 | Owens v. Baltimore City State's Attorneys Office | green | “a claim has 'facial plausibility when the plaintiff pleads factual content that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged.” | 57 |
| 14 | Ballard v. Carlson | green | “the magistrate's explicit warning that a recommendation of dismissal would result from failure to obey his order” | 49 |
| 15 | Jerry M. BASS; Bonnie Bass, Appellees, v. GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION, Appellant | green | “vested with the discretion to impose sanctions upon a party under its inherent disciplinary power.” | 45 |
| 16 | Greene v. Quest Diagnostics Clinical Laboratories, Inc. | green | “a party's general objections are not sufficient to challenge a magistrate judge's findings.” | 42 |
| 17 | Gantt v. MD Division of Correction | green | “federal courts possess an inherent authority to dismiss cases with prejudice sua sponte.” | 20 |
| 18 | Jordahl v. Democratic Party VA | green | “with the exception of habeas corpus actions, from sitting in direct review of state court decisions.” | 17 |
| 19 | First Bank of Marietta, Plaintiff-Appellant/cross-Appellee v. Hartford Underwriters Insurance Company, Defendant-Appellee/cross-Appellant | green | “imposition of inherent power sanctions requires a finding of bad faith,” | 11 |
| 20 | Mitan v. International Fidelity Insurance | green | “history of forum shopping and abusing the legal process” | 5 |
| 21 | Rice v. Lamanna | green | “generally, a 2241 petition 'attacks the execution of a sentence rather than its validity,' whereas a 2255 motion 'attacks the legality of detention.” | 3 |
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.