3 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 Weibert v. Rothe Bros., Inc..
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Weibert v. Rothe Bros., Inc. Anchor | green | “in order to determine the adequacy of the plan to accomplish its intended purpose, it is necessary to consider the adequacy of the replacement water rights.” | 7 |
| 2 | Desert Irrigation, Ltd. v. State of Nevada | green | “ven those holding certificated, vested, or perfected water rights do not own or acquire title to water. they merely enjoy the right to beneficial use.” | 6 |
| 3 | Town of Eureka v. Office of the State Engineer | green | “with questions of fact, the reviewing court must limit itself to a determination of whether substantial evidence in the record supports the state engineer's decision.” | 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.