7 canonical passages across 5 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 Williams v. Williams.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Williams v. Williams Anchor | green | “must directly involve a material element of the cause of action.” | 5 |
| 2 | Russenberger v. Russenberger | green | “a parent's request for a psychological evaluation may well be an expression of that parent's vindictiveness and could have the effect of making the child a victim.” | 4 |
| 3 | Wade v. Wade | green | “verified allegations that the parent in question is having mental problems that could substantially impact his or her ability to properly raise children.” | 4 |
| 4 | Russenberger v. Russenberger | green | “parties are entitled to know whether the court is proceeding under the rule or the statute.” | 3 |
| 5 | Wade v. Wade | green | “that could substantially impact the father's ability to properly raise children.” | 3 |
| 6 | J.B. v. M.M. | green | “sometimes upset when they returned from a visitation with their father” | 3 |
| 7 | Nobbe v. Nobbe | green | “should be based on evidence that the parent has been unable to meet the needs of the children.” | 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.