5 canonical passages across 5 cases, quoted by 29 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 Makah Indian Tribe v. C. William Verity.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Makah Indian Tribe v. C. William Verity Anchor | green | “the absent tribes would not be prejudiced because all of the tribes have an equal interest in an administrative process that is lawful.” | 9 |
| 2 | Harold Dawavendewa, a Single Man v. Salt River Project Agricultural Improvement and Power District, an Arizona Corporation, the Navajo Nation | green | “a party to a contract is necessary, and if not susceptible to joinder, indispensable to litigation seeking to decimate that contract.” | 8 |
| 3 | Conner v. Burford | green | “destroy the legal entitlements of the absent parties.” | 5 |
| 4 | The County of Fresno v. Cecil D. Andrus, National Land for People, Inc., Applicant for Intervention-Appellant | green | “the interests of a present party to the suit are such that it will undoubtedly make all” | 4 |
| 5 | Northern Alaska Environmental Center v. Donald P. Hodel, and Alaska Miners Association, Defendants-Intervenors-Appellants | green | “the absent tribes would not be prejudiced because all of the tribes have an equal interest in an administrative process that is lawful.” | 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.