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 3 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 Werner v. Werner.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Werner v. Werner Anchor | green | “with a preference for granting latitude and deference to our trial judges in family law matters.” | 16 |
| 2 | In Re Paternity of CS | green | “it is not enough that the evidence might support some other conclusion, but it must positively require the conclusion contended for by the appellant before there is a basis for reversal.” | 7 |
| 3 | Marriage of Kondamuri v. Kondamuri | green | “it is not enough that the evidence might support some other conclusion, but it must positively require the conclusion contended for by the appellant before there is a basis for reversal.” | 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.