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.
4 canonical passages across 2 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 Rosas v. Buddies Food Store.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Rosas v. Buddies Food Store Anchor | green | “one who enters on another's land with the owner's knowledge and for the mutual benefit of both.” | 11 |
| 2 | M.O. Dental Lab v. Rape | green | “in a premises liability case, the duty owed to the plaintiff depends on the status of the plaintiff at the time of the incident.” | 7 |
| 3 | Rosas v. Buddies Food Store | green | “with the owner's knowledge and for the mutual benefit of both” | 5 |
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.