3 canonical passages across 2 cases, quoted by 20 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 Dallas Railway & Terminal Company v. Gossett.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Dallas Railway & Terminal Company v. Gossett Anchor | green | “it is well settled that the naked and unsupported opinion or conclusion of a witness does not constitute evidence of probative force and will not support a jury finding even when admitted without objection.” | 11 |
| 2 | Rodriguez v. Service Lloyds Insurance Co. | green | “if the commission does not follow the clear, unambiguous language of its own regulation, we reverse its action as arbitrary and capricious.” | 7 |
| 3 | Dallas Railway & Terminal Company v. Gossett | green | “the naked and unsupported opinion or conclusion of a witness does not constitute evidence of probative force and will not support a jury finding even when admitted without objection.” | 2 |
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.