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 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 Marckstadt v. Lockheed Martin Corp..
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Marckstadt v. Lockheed Martin Corp. Anchor | green | “the decision to be applied nonretroactively must establish a new principle of law, either by overruling clear past precedent on which litigants may have relied, or by deciding an issue of first impression whose resolution was not clearly foreshadowed.” | 7 |
| 2 | Marckstadt v. Lockheed Martin Corp. | green | “the inequity imposed by retroactive application, for where a decision of this court could produce substantial inequitable results if applied retroactively, there is ample basis in our cases for avoiding the 'injustice or hardship' by a holding of nonretroactivity.” | 6 |
| 3 | Marckstadt v. Lockheed Martin Corp. | green | “weigh the merits and demerits in each case by looking to the prior history of the rule in question, its purpose and effect, and whether retrospective operation will further or retard its operation.” | 5 |
| 4 | Crutcher v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. | green | “the injured driver, though in theory having purchased uim coverage, would in fact have purchased only um coverage-rendering the inclusion of 'uim' in the statute superfluous.” | 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.