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.
5 canonical passages across 5 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 Texas Education Agency v. Leeper.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Texas Education Agency v. Leeper Anchor | green | “were only recommended, not prescriptive” | 4 |
| 2 | Scally v. Texas State Board of Medical Examiners | green | “resolving factual conflicts and ambiguities is the agency's function, and the purpose of substantial-evidence review is to protect that function.” | 4 |
| 3 | Teladoc, Inc. v. Texas Medical Board and Nancy Leshikar, in Her Official Capacity as General Counsel of the Texas Medical Board | green | “defines 'rule' in a way that will exclude a considerable range of unofficial, individually directed, tentative or other non-proscriptive agency or staff issuances concerning law or policy.” | 4 |
| 4 | Combs v. Entertainment Publications, Inc. | green | “we consider the intent of the agency, the prescriptive nature of the guidelines, and the context in which the agency statement was made.” | 3 |
| 5 | Texas State Board of Pharmacy v. Witcher | green | “although the guidelines considered in slay were intended to achieve a level of consistency when similar circumstances were present, they did not require a specific result in all cases.” | 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.