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.
6 canonical passages across 3 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 Cole v. HARVEYLAND, LLC.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Cole v. HARVEYLAND, LLC Anchor | green | “the critical concept in determining whether a court has subject matter jurisdiction is the type of controversy.” | 8 |
| 2 | Cole v. HARVEYLAND, LLC | green | “if the type of controversy is within the subject matter jurisdiction, then all other defects or errors go to something other than subject matter jurisdiction.” | 7 |
| 3 | Marley v. Department of Labor & Industries | green | “a court or agency does not lack subject matter jurisdiction solely because it may lack authority to enter a given order.” | 5 |
| 4 | Shoop v. Kittitas County | green | “constitution provides the foundation for an independent and coequal judicial branch of state government.” | 5 |
| 5 | Cole v. HARVEYLAND, LLC | green | “as the united states supreme court has observed, 'jurisdiction' is a word of too many meanings.” | 4 |
| 6 | Shoop v. Kittitas County | green | “subject matter jurisdiction that cannot be whittled away by statutes.” | 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.