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 23 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 Halperin v. Pitts.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Halperin v. Pitts Anchor | green | “our goal is to determine the meaning of the statute that the legislature that enacted it most likely intended.” | 4 |
| 2 | MARTIN ET UX v. Reynolds Metals Co. | green | “an actionable invasion of a possessor's interest in the exclusive possession of land.” | 4 |
| 3 | Abraham v. T. Henry Construction, Inc. | green | “tort claims arising out of the construction of a house must be brought within two years of the date that the cause of action accrues,” | 3 |
| 4 | Beveridge v. King | green | “any interest of another in real property.” | 3 |
| 5 | Beveridge v. King | green | “for interference with or injury to any interest of another in real property.” | 3 |
| 6 | Baker v. Croslin | green | “unless there is evidence that that is precisely what the legislature intended” | 3 |
| 7 | In Re Stout's Estate | green | “the question of what constitutes waste by a life tenant is determined primarily by the circumstance of whether or not the act, either of commission or omission, results in injury to the reversioner or the remainderman.” | 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.