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.
7 canonical passages across 7 cases, quoted by 33 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 First Wisconsin National Bank v. Kramer.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | First Wisconsin National Bank v. Kramer Anchor | green | “a lawsuit which has been pursued to judgment should be as conclusive in every other court as it is in the court where judgment was entered.” | 6 |
| 2 | In Re Demuth | green | “through the use of its exclusive judicial power to prescribe rules governing attorney conduct, and to discipline attorneys for violating those rules, our supreme court has created a comprehensive program to regulate attorneys and punish their misconduct.” | 6 |
| 3 | Miller UK Ltd. v. Caterpillar, Inc. | green | “the defense of champerty can only be interposed in an action between the parties to the champertous contract, and does not furnish any reason for refusing relief in the proceeding to which the champertous agreement relates.” | 5 |
| 4 | Johnson v. Wright | green | “an agreement between a stranger to a lawsuit and a litigant by which the stranger pursues the litigant's claims as consideration for receiving part of any judgment proceeds.” | 4 |
| 5 | People Ex Rel. Brazen v. Finley | green | “through the use of its exclusive judicial power to prescribe rules governing attorney conduct, and to discipline attorneys for violating those rules, our supreme court has created a comprehensive program to regulate attorneys and punish their misconduct.” | 4 |
| 6 | Midwest Concrete Products Co. v. La Salle National Bank | green | “prospect funding holdings llc has relied on this irrevocable letter of direction to fund the purchase agreement.” | 4 |
| 7 | Ness v. Gurstel Chargo, P.A. | green | “the defense of champerty can only be interposed in an action between the parties to the champertous contract, and does not furnish any reason for refusing relief in the proceeding to which the champertous agreement relates.” | 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.