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 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 Henderson v. Henderson.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Henderson v. Henderson Anchor | green | “chancellors are afforded wide latitude in fashioning equitable remedies in domestic relations matters, and their decisions will not be reversed if the findings of fact are supported by substantial credible evidence in the record.” | 13 |
| 2 | Coggin v. Coggin | green | “judgment for that of the chancellor, even if we disagree with the findings of fact and would arrive at a different conclusion.” | 4 |
| 3 | Henderson v. Henderson | green | “substantial credible evidence in the record” | 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.