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.
6 canonical passages across 5 cases, quoted by 114 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 Kirsch ex rel. Kirsch v. Brightstar Corp..
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Kirsch ex rel. Kirsch v. Brightstar Corp. Anchor | green | “on summary judgment, the court limits its analysis of the facts to the evidence that is presented in the parties' local rule 56.1 statements.” | 44 |
| 2 | Micaelina Ortiz v. John O. Butler Company | green | “speculation is insufficient to withstand summary judgment.” | 20 |
| 3 | Malec v. Sanford | green | “factual allegations not properly supported by citation to the record are nullities.” | 18 |
| 4 | Gbur v. City of Harvey | green | “district courts are 'entitled to expect strict compliance' with rule 56.1, and do not abuse their discretion when they opt to disregard facts presented in a manner that does not follow the rule's instructions.” | 15 |
| 5 | Micaelina Ortiz v. John O. Butler Company | green | “the nonmoving party 'must do more than simply show there is some metaphysical doubt as to the material facts.” | 11 |
| 6 | Federal Trade Commission v. Bay Area Business Council, Inc. | green | “organizing the evidence and identifying disputed facts.” | 6 |
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.