3 canonical passages across 3 cases, quoted by 13 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 Henry Products Inc. v. Tarmu.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Henry Products Inc. v. Tarmu Anchor | green | “evidence introduced in support of or opposition to a motion for summary judgment must be admissible evidence.” | 5 |
| 2 | Northern Nevada Ass'n of Injured Workers v. Nevada State Industrial Insurance System | green | “in analyzing respondents' entitlement to immunity under nrs 41.0321, it is necessary to determine whether the acts alleged in appellants' amended complaint are properly categorized as discretionary.” | 4 |
| 3 | Donna Young v. United States | green | “to identify the particular agency conduct with which laintiffs take issue, we look to the allegations of laintiffs' complaint” | 4 |
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.