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.
3 canonical passages across 2 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 Nemeroff v. Abelson.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Nemeroff v. Abelson Anchor | green | “when it has some legal and factual support, considered in light of the reasonable beliefs of the individual making the claim.” | 6 |
| 2 | Nemeroff v. Abelson | green | “the question is whether a reasonable attorney could have concluded that facts supporting the claim might be established, not whether such facts actually had been established.” | 4 |
| 3 | Schlaifer Nance & Co., Inc. v. Estate of Warhol | green | “the jury's finding of fraud and its award of a total of 3 million in punitive damages could only have been the product of sheer surmise and speculation.” | 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.