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 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 State ex rel. Doner v. Zody.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | State ex rel. Doner v. Zody Anchor | green | “a preponderance of the evidence is defined as that measure of proof that convinces the judge or jury that the existence of the fact sought to be proved is more likely than its nonexistence.” | 8 |
| 2 | Felix v. Ganley Chevrolet, Inc. (Slip Opinion) | green | “to fall within that exception, the party bringing the class action must affirmatively demonstrate compliance with the procedural rules governing class actions.” | 7 |
| 3 | State ex rel. Doner v. Zody | green | “is defined as that measure of proof that convinces the judge or jury that the existence of the fact sought to be proved is more likely than its nonexistence.” | 5 |
| 4 | Felix v. Ganley Chevrolet, Inc. (Slip Opinion) | green | “class-action suits are the exception to the usual rule that litigation is conducted by and on behalf of only the individually named parties.” | 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.