5 canonical passages across 4 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 Capruso v. Village of Kings Point.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Capruso v. Village of Kings Point Anchor | green | “what petitioner shows here is a dispute with public authorities about what is desirable for the park, . . . not a demonstration of illegality” | 3 |
| 2 | In re the County of Monroe | green | “use and enjoy the recreational benefits of the niagara reservation park.” | 3 |
| 3 | Heritage Coalition, Inc. v. City of Ithaca Planning | green | “appreciation for historical and architectural artifacts does not rise to the level of injury different from that of the public at large for standing purposes” | 3 |
| 4 | Espinoza v. Berbary | green | “authority to pass upon the sufficiency of the underlying pleading” | 3 |
| 5 | Espinoza v. Berbary | green | “when a party seeks an injunction, it 'opens the record and gives the court authority to pass upon the sufficiency of the underlying pleading” | 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.