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 44 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 Angelo v. Armstrong World Industries, Inc..
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Angelo v. Armstrong World Industries, Inc. Anchor | green | “bifurcation is not an abuse of discretion if such interests favor separation of issues and the issues are clearly separable.” | 23 |
| 2 | Angelo v. Armstrong World Industries, Inc. | green | “regardless of efficiency and separability, however, bifurcation is an abuse of discretion if it is unfair or prejudicial to a party.” | 10 |
| 3 | Belisle v. BNSF Railway Co. | green | “in light of the general principle that a single trial tends to lessen the delay, expense, and inconvenience.” | 7 |
| 4 | United States Ex Rel. Bahrani v. Conagra, Inc. | green | “for convenience, to avoid prejudice, or to expedite and economize.” | 4 |
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.