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.
3 canonical passages across 3 cases, quoted by 18 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 Kraus v. Board Of County Road Commissioners For The County Of Kent.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Kraus v. Board Of County Road Commissioners For The County Of Kent Anchor | green | “not intended to open the floodgates to a vast number of appeals from interlocutory orders in ordinary litigation.” | 6 |
| 2 | Alexander v. Provident Life & Accident Insurance | green | “has the burden of showing exceptional circumstances exist warranting an interlocutory appeal.” | 6 |
| 3 | United States ex rel. Elliott v. Brickman Group Ltd. | green | “attractive as it may be to refer difficult matters to a higher court for advance decision, such a course of action is contrary to our system of jurisprudence.” | 6 |
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.