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 6 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 Mejia v. Erwin.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Mejia v. Erwin Anchor | green | “knew, or should have known in the exercise of ordinary care, that the person to whom the vehicle was entrusted is reckless, heedless, or incompetent.” | 3 |
| 2 | Mejia v. Erwin | green | “knew, or should have known in the exercise of ordinary care, that cote is reckless, heedless, or incompetent.” | 3 |
| 3 | J-U-B Engineers, Inc. v. Routsen | green | “grant a judgment, even by default, when it clearly has no merit.” | 3 |
| 4 | Kelley v. Carr | green | “even after default it remains for the court to consider whether the unchallenged facts constitute a legitimate cause of action, since a party in default does not admit mere conclusions of law.” | 3 |
| 5 | Curley v. General Valet Service, Inc. | green | “disregard for the law, the rules of society and for others.” | 3 |
| 6 | Gormley v. Robertson | green | “findings of fact are entitled to deference while conclusions of law are reviewed de novo” | 3 |
| 7 | Gormley v. Robertson | green | “findings of fact are entitled to deference while conclusions of law are reviewed de novo” | 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.