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.
5 canonical passages across 5 cases, quoted by 41 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 Leavitt v. Siems.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Leavitt v. Siems Anchor | green | “an abuse of discretion occurs when no reasonable judge could reach a similar conclusion under the same circumstances.” | 18 |
| 2 | Las Vegas Convention & Visitors Authority v. Miller | green | “we will affirm the district court if it reaches the right result, even when it does so for the wrong reason.” | 8 |
| 3 | Callie v. Bowling | green | “must do so in an independent action against the alleged alter ego with the requisite notice, service of process, and other attributes of due process” | 7 |
| 4 | Herup v. First Boston Financial, LLC | green | “three types of transfers may be set aside under the ufta: (1) actual fraudulent transfers; (2) constructive fraudulent transfers; and (3) certain transfers by insolvent debtors.” | 4 |
| 5 | Howard Hughes Medical Institute v. Gavin | green | “eneither mere conjecture nor hope of proving the allegations of a pleading is sufficient to create a factual issue” | 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.