4 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 Wright v. Chicago Title Insurance Co..
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Wright v. Chicago Title Insurance Co. Anchor | green | “there is a strong presumption against provisions that easily could have been included in the contract but were not.” | 10 |
| 2 | Air Safety, Inc. v. Teachers Realty Corp. | green | “where parties formally include an integration clause in their contract, they are explicitly manifesting their intention to protect themselves against misinterpretations which might arise from extrinsic evidence.” | 7 |
| 3 | Miner v. Fashion Enterprises, Inc. | green | “there is a strong presumption against provisions that easily could have been included in the contract but were not.” | 3 |
| 4 | Wright v. Chicago Title Insurance Co. | green | “a court will not rewrite a contract to suit one of the parties, but will enforce the terms as written. there is a strong presumption against provisions that easily could have been included in the contract but were not.” | 2 |
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.