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 179 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 Flores v. Graphtex.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Flores v. Graphtex Anchor | green | “providing an easy mode of identification for referring to a particular paragraph in a prior pleading.” | 63 |
| 2 | Flores v. Graphtex | green | “the purpose . . . is to give fair notice of the claim being asserted so as to permit the adverse party the opportunity to file a responsive answer, prepare an adequate defense and determine whether the doctrine of res judicata is applicable.” | 41 |
| 3 | Salahuddin v. Cuomo | green | “dismissal . . . is usually reserved for those cases in which the complaint is so confused, ambiguous, vague, or otherwise unintelligible that its true substance, if any, is well disguised.” | 38 |
| 4 | Salahuddin v. Cuomo | green | “when a complaint does not comply with the requirement that it be short and plain, the court has the power, on its own initiative . . . to dismiss the complaint.” | 37 |
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.