7 canonical passages across 5 cases, quoted by 28 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 Sonic-Calabasas A, Inc. v. Moreno.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Sonic-Calabasas A, Inc. v. Moreno Anchor | green | “so one-sided as to 'shock the conscience.” | 4 |
| 2 | A & M PRODUCE CO. v. FMC Corp. | green | “they need not be present in the same degree.” | 4 |
| 3 | Goldman v. KPMG, LLP | green | “for 'claims that are based on the same facts and are inherently inseparable from arbitrable claims,” | 4 |
| 4 | Dream Theater, Inc. v. Dream Theater | green | “no matter how broad the arbitration clause, it may be necessary to file an action in court to enforce an arbitration agreement, or to obtain a judgment enforcing an arbitration award, and the parties may need to invoke the jurisdiction of a court to obtain other remedies.” | 4 |
| 5 | Mohamed v. Uber Technologies, Inc. | green | “the existence of a meaningful right to opt-out of arbitration necessarily renders the arbitration clause (and the delegation clause specifically) procedurally conscionable as a matter of law.” | 4 |
| 6 | Mohamed v. Uber Technologies, Inc. | green | “any disputes, actions, claims, or causes of action arising out of or in connection with this agreement or the uber service or software shall be subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of the state and federal courts located in the city and county of san francisco.” | 4 |
| 7 | Mohamed v. Uber Technologies, Inc. | green | “cannot follow the ninth circuit cases cited by uber in the face of directly contradicting california supreme court authority.” | 4 |
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.