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.
7 canonical passages across 3 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 Collins v. Retirement Board of the Policemen's Annuity & Benefit Fund.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Collins v. Retirement Board of the Policemen's Annuity & Benefit Fund Anchor | green | “make a systematic inquiry or examination to gather evidence of a crime; rather, she prepared an initial response card for police and on occasion fulfilled requests for name and license plate information or prepared requests for evidence technicians or police crime laboratory uni…” | 4 |
| 2 | Collins v. Retirement Board of the Policemen's Annuity & Benefit Fund | green | “to observe or study by close examination and systematic inquiry,' 'to make a systematic examination,' and 'to conduct an official inquiry.” | 4 |
| 3 | Collins v. Retirement Board of the Policemen's Annuity & Benefit Fund | green | “left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed.” | 4 |
| 4 | Esquivel v. Retirement Board of the Policemen's Annuity and Benefit Fund | green | “civilian senior public safety aide/bilingual” | 4 |
| 5 | Esquivel v. Retirement Board of the Policemen's Annuity and Benefit Fund | green | “minimized the unrebutted evidence presented” | 4 |
| 6 | Esquivel v. Retirement Board of the Policemen's Annuity and Benefit Fund | green | “nonetheless, that the clearly erroneous standard is largely deferential does not mean, however, that a reviewing court must blindly defer to the agency's decision.” | 4 |
| 7 | Saffold v. City of Chicago | green | “shall be created and maintained for the benefit of its policemen, their widows and children, and of all contributors to, participants in, and beneficiaries of any police pension fund in operation, by authority of law, in such city immediately prior to the effective date.” | 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.