5 canonical passages across 4 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 Wheeler v. Hronopoulos.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Wheeler v. Hronopoulos Anchor | green | “failing to bring an argument to the district court means that you waive that argument on appeal.” | 12 |
| 2 | Sylvia Evans, Administrator of the Estate of Andrew Evans v. City of Chicago | green | “on the existence of a substantial claim under federal law.” | 5 |
| 3 | Joshua Kelly v. Timothy Wengler | green | “under well established law, substantial violation of a court order constitutes a significant change in factual circumstances.” | 5 |
| 4 | United States v. Scott Carlberg | green | “we will find an abuse of discretion if there is no evidence in the record on which the district court could have rationally based its deci- sion.” | 5 |
| 5 | Sylvia Evans, Administrator of the Estate of Andrew Evans v. City of Chicago | green | “entry and continued enforcement of a consent decree regulating the op- eration of a governmental body depend on the existence of a substantial claim under federal law.” | 2 |
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.