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 Estes v. Titus.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Estes v. Titus Anchor | green | “the application of legal doctrines, such as res judicata and collateral estoppel.” | 5 |
| 2 | Sewell v. Clean Cut Management, Inc | green | “(1) the first action was decided on the merits, (2) the matter contested in the second action was or could have been resolved in the first, and (3) both actions involve the same parties or their privies.” | 5 |
| 3 | Sewell v. Clean Cut Management, Inc | green | “a second action is barred when (1) the first action was decided on the merits, (2) the matter contested in the second action was or could have been resolved in the first, and (3) both actions involve the same parties or their privies.” | 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.