4 canonical passages across 3 cases, quoted by 105 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 Frank D. Gaus v. Miles, Inc., an Indiana Corporation.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Frank D. Gaus v. Miles, Inc., an Indiana Corporation Anchor | green | “strictly construe the removal statute against removal jurisdiction.” | 75 |
| 2 | Coso Energy Developers v. County of Inyo | green | “because the land was ceded to the united states by mexico, and not by california, the statute did not effect a transfer of california's jurisdiction” | 10 |
| 3 | Kenneth Lake v. Ohana Military Communities | green | “(a) it is a 'person' within the meaning of the statute; (b) there is a causal nexus between its actions, taken pursuant to a federal officer's directions, and central district of california civil minutes - general date: november 15, 2021 cv 21-4994 mwf (ex): allstate insurance c…” | 10 |
| 4 | Kenneth Lake v. Ohana Military Communities | green | “we have only found federal question jurisdiction in enclaves in which congress has not permitted concurrent jurisdiction, and we have not extended that rule to federal land that is subject to broad state concurrent jurisdiction.” | 10 |
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.