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.
6 canonical passages across 4 cases, quoted by 19 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 City of Dallas v. VSC, LLC.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | City of Dallas v. VSC, LLC Anchor | green | “where the parties have not argued that there are any material differences between the state and federal versions of a constitutional provision, we typically treat the two clauses as congruent.” | 4 |
| 2 | In Re the Commitment of Lowe | green | “it is the trial court's duty to consider the witness's evidence and argument on each individual question and determine whether the privilege against self-incrimination is meritorious.” | 3 |
| 3 | In Re the Commitment of Lowe | green | “duty to consider the witness's evidence and argument on each individual question and determine whether the privilege against self-incrimination is meritorious.” | 3 |
| 4 | In Re Speer | green | “waive his privilege against self-incrimination by denying the requests for admissions” | 3 |
| 5 | Katin v. City of Lubbock | green | “an admission under this rule is not an admission for any other purpose and cannot be used against the party in any other proceeding.” | 3 |
| 6 | Katin v. City of Lubbock | green | “compliance with the law did not result in waiver of the right to assert the privilege as to other requested discovery.” | 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.