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 2 cases, quoted by 15 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 Utah Environmental Congress v. Bosworth.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Utah Environmental Congress v. Bosworth Anchor | green | “is especially strong where the challenged decisions involve technical or scientific matters within the agency's area of expertise.” | 5 |
| 2 | Don Olenhouse v. Commodity Credit Corporation | green | “evidence is substantial in the apa sense if it is enough to justify, if the trial were to a jury, a refusal to direct a verdict when the conclusion to be drawn is one of fact.” | 5 |
| 3 | Don Olenhouse v. Commodity Credit Corporation | green | “evidence is substantial in the apa sense if it is 'enough to justify, if the trial were to a jury, a refusal to direct a verdict when the conclusion to be drawn is one of fact.” | 5 |
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.