4 canonical passages across 3 cases, quoted by 19 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 Gray Ex Rel. Rudd v. Beverly Enterprises-Mississippi, Inc..
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Gray Ex Rel. Rudd v. Beverly Enterprises-Mississippi, Inc. Anchor | green | “1441's holistic approach to removal mandates that the existence of even a single valid cause of action against in- state defendants (despite the pleading of several unavailing claims) requires remand of the entire case to state court.” | 5 |
| 2 | Randy Austin v. Kroger Texas, L.P. | green | “rule 54(b) allows parties to seek reconsideration of interlocutory orders and authorizes the district court to 'revise at any time' 'any order or other decision . . . does not end the action.” | 5 |
| 3 | Randy Austin v. Kroger Texas, L.P. | green | “under rule 54(b), the trial court is free to reconsider and reverse its decision for any reason it deems sufficient, even in the absence of new evidence or an intervening change in or clarification of the substantive law.” | 5 |
| 4 | Tommy Morris v. Salvatore Nuzzo | green | “ultimately, we think it a very close question whether the fraudulent joinder doctrine ought to extend to diverse resident defendant, and we are reluctant to rule definitively on the issue today absent a more thorough and more able presentation of the relevant balance of interests” | 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.