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.
3 canonical passages across 2 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 Levings v. Forbes & Wallace, Inc..
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Levings v. Forbes & Wallace, Inc. Anchor | green | “the objectionable conduct must attain a level of rascality that would raise an eyebrow of someone inured to the rough and tumble of the world of commerce.” | 17 |
| 2 | Massachusetts Eye & Ear Infirmary v. QLT Phototherapeutics, Inc. | green | “it is neither necessary nor sufficient that a particular act or practice violate common or statutory law.” | 6 |
| 3 | Levings v. Forbes & Wallace, Inc. | green | “a level of rascality that would raise an eyebrow of someone inured to the rough and tumble of the world of commerce.” | 6 |
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.