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 26 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 Barlow v. Male Geneva Police Officer.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Barlow v. Male Geneva Police Officer Anchor | green | “the evidence is such that a reasonable jury could return a verdict for the nonmoving party.” | 13 |
| 2 | Greco v. Trauner | green | “an objective analysis that seeks to protect the naive from abusive practices, while simultaneously shielding debt collectors from liability for bizarre or idiosyncratic interpretations of debt collection letters.” | 7 |
| 3 | Kolbasyuk ex rel. Situated v. Capital Mgmt. Servs., LP | green | “in the second circuit, 'the question of whether a communication complies with the fdcpa is determined from the perspective of the 'least sophisticated consumer.” | 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.