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 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 Conquistador Petroleum, Inc. v. Chatham.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Conquistador Petroleum, Inc. v. Chatham Anchor | green | “so long as the ground appears in the motion or response, it need not be supported by factual detail or legal argument.” | 3 |
| 2 | City of Houston v. Savely | green | “an ordinance that attempts to annex territory within the etj or municipal boundaries of another city is void.” | 3 |
| 3 | City of Murphy v. City of Parker | green | “the legislature has the power to entirely eliminate the requirement that a city give its written consent to a reduction of its etj.” | 3 |
| 4 | Village of Creedmoor v. Frost National Bank | green | “whoever first commences legal proceedings asserting authority over the territory in question thereby acquires jurisdiction over same” | 3 |
| 5 | Sem v. State | green | “we are not permitted by statutory construction to add additional language to the statute unless it is necessary to give effect to clear legislative intent.” | 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.