3 canonical passages across 3 cases, quoted by 22 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 Leticia Valdez v. Allstate Insurance Company, an Illinois Corporation Allstate Indemnity Co., an Illinois Corporation.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Leticia Valdez v. Allstate Insurance Company, an Illinois Corporation Allstate Indemnity Co., an Illinois Corporation Anchor | green | “the amount-in-controversy inquiry in the removal context is not confined to the face of the complaint.” | 14 |
| 2 | Brandon Campbell v. Vitran Express, Inc. | green | “the court must assume that the allegations of the complaint are true and that a jury will return a verdict for the plaintiff on all claims in the complaint.” | 4 |
| 3 | Kenneth Rothschild Trust v. Morgan Stanley Dean Witter | green | “the court must assume that the allegations of the complaint are true and that a jury will return a verdict for the plaintiff on all claims in the complaint.” | 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.