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 17 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 In Re William Bruce Arnett.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | In Re William Bruce Arnett Anchor | green | “a rigidly literal approach in the construction of language” | 4 |
| 2 | United States v. Jimmy Lee Jefferies, Betty J. Jefferies | green | “this analogy, however, should not be taken too far.” | 4 |
| 3 | United States v. King | green | “the plain error test is difficult to meet.” | 3 |
| 4 | The Boatmen's National Bank of St. Louis v. Robert F. Smith and M-T Acquisition Corporation | green | “where the document contains both general and specific provisions relating to the same subject, the specific provision controls” | 3 |
| 5 | United States v. John Weaver, Thomas D. Sikes | green | “plea agreements are interpreted and applied in a manner that is sometimes likened to contractual interpretation.” | 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.