4 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 Support, Inc. v. Industrial Claim Appeals Office of the Colorado.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Support, Inc. v. Industrial Claim Appeals Office of the Colorado Anchor | green | “if it is inconsistent with the clear language of the statute or with the legislative intent.” | 12 |
| 2 | Anderson v. Longmont Toyota, Inc. | green | “the plain and ordinary meaning of the statute, if clear.” | 3 |
| 3 | Arenas v. Industrial Claim Appeals Office | green | “we may not interfere with the alj's credibility determinations” | 2 |
| 4 | Arenas v. Industrial Claim Appeals Office | green | “further, we may not interfere with the alj's credibility determinations except in the extreme circumstance where the evidence credited is so overwhelmingly rebutted by hard, certain evidence that the alj would err as a matter of law in crediting it.” | 1 |
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.