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.
7 canonical passages across 5 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 United States v. Fei Ye, AKA Ye Fei Ming Zhong, AKA Zhong Ming AKA Andy Zhong.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | United States v. Fei Ye, AKA Ye Fei Ming Zhong, AKA Zhong Ming AKA Andy Zhong Anchor | green | “will not investigate further unless its application leads to unreasonable or impracticable results.” | 3 |
| 2 | Flagstaff Vending Co. v. City of Flagstaff | green | “exterior boundary of flagstaff.” | 3 |
| 3 | Flagstaff Vending Co. v. City of Flagstaff | green | “on the innerside . . . inside the bounds of a region.” | 3 |
| 4 | Carefree Improvement Ass'n v. City of Scottsdale | green | “exercise a strong degree of control over zoning and development” | 3 |
| 5 | Gila River Indian Community v. United States | green | “both sides advocate reasonable interpretations” | 3 |
| 6 | Gila River Indian Community v. United States | green | “the meaning of 'within the corporate limits' to be ambiguous” | 3 |
| 7 | Kane v. City of Beaverton | green | “there are a number of rational and legitimate reasons for disparate treatment of 'island' territories . . . .” | 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.