8 canonical passages across 7 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 PPG Architectural Finishes, Inc. v. Lowery.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | PPG Architectural Finishes, Inc. v. Lowery Anchor | green | “undiscoverable by reasonable methods.” | 6 |
| 2 | Ike W. Thrash v. Deutsch Kerrigan & Stiles, LLP. | green | “the moving party bears the burden to show that no genuine issue of material fact exists, and the evidence must be viewed in the light most favorable to the nonmovant.” | 6 |
| 3 | Pearlie Wright v. R.M.Smith Investments, L.P. | green | “summary judgment is proper if there is no genuine issue of material fact and the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law.” | 6 |
| 4 | Wayne General Hosp. v. Hayes | green | “a plaintiff must be reasonably diligent in investigating the circumstances surrounding the injury.” | 4 |
| 5 | Stringer Ex Rel. Stringer v. Trapp | green | “occasionally the question of whether the suit is barred by the statute of limitations is a question of fact for the jury; however, as with other putative fact questions, the question may be taken away from the jury if reasonable minds could not differ as to the conclusion.” | 4 |
| 6 | American Optical Corporation v. Robert Lee Rankin, Jr. | green | “knowledge of the cause of the injury is irrelevant to the analysis; rather, the inquiry is when the plaintiff knew or should have known of an injury.” | 4 |
| 7 | Ladnier v. Hester | green | “if there is any doubt regarding the existence of a genuine issue of material fact, the benefit goes to the nonmovant.” | 4 |
| 8 | American Optical Corporation v. Robert Lee Rankin, Jr. | green | “because there is no bright line rule, the specific facts of the case will determine whether the plaintiff knew or reasonably should have known that an injury existed.” | 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.