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 3 cases, quoted by 21 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 William Nadworny v. Michael v. Fair.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | William Nadworny v. Michael v. Fair Anchor | green | “federal habeas is not an ordinary error-correcting writ.” | 7 |
| 2 | William Nadworny v. Michael v. Fair | green | “exists to rescue those in custody from the failure to apply federal rights, correctly or at all.” | 6 |
| 3 | Pike v. Guarino | green | “the aedpa sets out a separate and exacting standard applicable to review of a state court's factual findings.” | 5 |
| 4 | Brown v. Ruane | green | “must be great enough to make the decision unreasonable in the independent and objective judgment of the federal court.” | 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.