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.
4 canonical passages across 3 cases, quoted by 37 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 International Association of MacHinists and Aerospace Workers, Afl-Cio v. Compania Mexicana De Aviacion, S.A. De C.V..
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | International Association of MacHinists and Aerospace Workers, Afl-Cio v. Compania Mexicana De Aviacion, S.A. De C.V. Anchor | green | “courts consider the evidence in the light most favorable to the nonmovant, yet the nonmovant may not rely on mere allegations in the pleading; rather, the nonmovant must respond to the motion for summary judgment by setting forth particular facts indicating that there is a genui…” | 17 |
| 2 | Meadows v. Hartford Life Insurance | green | “to establish a claim for knowing participation in a breach of fiduciary duty, a plaintiff must assert: (1) the existence of a fiduciary relationship; (2) that the third party knew of the fiduciary relationship; and (3) that the third party was aware that it was participating in …” | 8 |
| 3 | Meadows v. Hartford Life Insurance | green | “(1) the existence of a fiduciary relationship; (2) that the third party knew of the fiduciary relationship; and (3) that the third party was aware that it was participating in the breach of that fiduciary relationship.” | 6 |
| 4 | Jacqueline Smith v. Harris County Sheriff | green | “identifies a lack of evidence to support the plaintiff's claim on an issue for which the plaintiff would bear the burden of proof at trial,” | 6 |
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.