6 canonical passages across 6 cases, quoted by 23 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 Kloeckner v. Solis.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Kloeckner v. Solis Anchor | green | “ven the most formidable argument concerning the statute's purposes could not overcome the clarity we find in the statute's text.” | 8 |
| 2 | Mohamad v. Palestinian Authority | green | “etitioners' purposive argument simply cannot overcome the force of the plain text.” | 3 |
| 3 | UBS Financial Services, Incorporated v. Carilion Clinic | green | “he obligation to arbitrate under finra rule 12200 can be superseded and displaced by a more specific agreement between the parties.” | 3 |
| 4 | Goldman, Sachs & Co. v. City of Reno | green | “as a threshold matter, ... a contract between the parties can supersede the default obliga tion to arbitrate under the finra rules.” | 3 |
| 5 | Wisconsin Central Limited v. Tienergy, LLC | green | “rule 58's 'separate doc ument' requirement is important because it keeps jurisdic tional lines clear.” | 3 |
| 6 | New Prime Inc. v. Oliveira | green | “congress adopted the arbitration act in an effort to ... establish a liberal federal pol icy favoring arbitration agreements.” | 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.