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.
7 canonical passages across 6 cases, quoted by 25 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 Benat v. Dallas County.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Benat v. Dallas County Anchor | green | “twilight zone in which cities and counties have concurrent jurisdiction.” | 5 |
| 2 | Harrison County v. City of Marshall | green | “removes the power from the county to lay out and regulate roads within the city limits,” | 4 |
| 3 | City of Breckenridge v. Stephens County | green | “when such improvements are made without conflicting with the jurisdiction of the municipality, or with its consent or approval.” | 4 |
| 4 | City of Houston v. Goings | green | “public bridge forming a connecting link in a municipal street or highway is part of that street or highway” | 3 |
| 5 | Benat v. Dallas County | green | “twilight zone in which cities and counties have concurrent jurisdiction” | 3 |
| 6 | City of Breckenridge v. Stephens County | green | “in the manner authorized by law.” | 3 |
| 7 | Adams v. Rockwall County | green | “exclusive control over and under the public highways, streets, and alleys of the municipality.” | 3 |
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.