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 3 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 Jarboe v. Landmark Community Newspapers of Indiana, Inc..
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Jarboe v. Landmark Community Newspapers of Indiana, Inc. Anchor | green | “the party seeking summary judgment must demonstrate the absence of any genuine issue of fact as to a determinative issue, and only then is the non-movant required to come forward with contrary evidence.” | 8 |
| 2 | Diversified Financial Systems, Inc. v. Miner | green | “we give careful scrutiny to the pleadings and designated materials, construing them in a light most favorable to the non-movant.” | 6 |
| 3 | J.C. Spence & Associates, Inc. v. Geary | green | “we give careful scrutiny to the pleadings and designated materials, construing them in a light most favorable to the non-movant.” | 6 |
| 4 | Jarboe v. Landmark Community Newspapers of Indiana, Inc. | green | “under indiana's standard, the party seeking summary judgment must demonstrate the absence of any genuine issue of fact as to a determinative issue, and only then is the non-movant required to come forward with contrary evidence.” | 5 |
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.