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.
4 canonical passages across 4 cases, quoted by 13 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 Resources Limited, Inc. v. Robertson.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Resources Limited, Inc. v. Robertson Anchor | green | “the 'existence of a viable but unexamined alternative renders an environmental impact statement inadequate.” | 4 |
| 2 | United States v. Commonwealth of Puerto Rico and Environmental Quality Board | green | “discharge of any pollutant by any person” | 3 |
| 3 | United States v. M.C.C. Of Florida, Inc. | green | “moves water between hydrologically connected water bodies containing water of like quality” | 3 |
| 4 | City Of Carmel-By-The-Sea v. United States Department Of Transportation | green | “a rule of reason in determining whether an eis contains a reasonably thorough discussion of the significant aspects of the probable environmental consequences.” | 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.