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 2 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 Wichita Falls Office Associates v. Banc One Corporation, Banc One Corporation and Bank One, Texas, N.A..
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Wichita Falls Office Associates v. Banc One Corporation, Banc One Corporation and Bank One, Texas, N.A. Anchor | green | “trial judge's decision to curtail discovery is granted great deference,” | 17 |
| 2 | Alice Elaine Cook v. Kartridg Pak Company and Consolidated Foods Corporation D/B/A Rudy's Farm Company | green | “a district court must be free to use and control pretrial procedure in furtherance of the orderly administration of justice.” | 5 |
| 3 | Alice Elaine Cook v. Kartridg Pak Company and Consolidated Foods Corporation D/B/A Rudy's Farm Company | green | “a district 26 court must be free to use and control pretrial procedure in furtherance of the orderly 27 administration of justice.” | 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.