3 canonical passages across 3 cases, quoted by 11 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 Chateaugay Corporation.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | In Re Chateaugay Corporation Anchor | green | “lassification is constrained by two straight-forward rules: dissimilar claims may not be classified together; similar claims may be classified separately only for a legitimate reason.” | 4 |
| 2 | In Re Cellular Information Systems, Inc. | green | “he plan proponent need only demonstrate that there exists the reasonable probability that the provisions of the plan can be performed” | 4 |
| 3 | In Re Texaco Inc. | green | “in determining whether a plan complies with section 1129(a)(1), reference must be made to code 1122 and 1123 with respect to the classification of claims and the contents of a plan of reorganization” | 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.