4 canonical passages across 2 cases, quoted by 12 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 United States v. Craig Koblitz and Robert Scott Donley, and Marcelino J. Huerta, III and Anthony F. Gonzalez, Contemnors-Appellants.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | United States v. Craig Koblitz and Robert Scott Donley, and Marcelino J. Huerta, III and Anthony F. Gonzalez, Contemnors-Appellants Anchor | green | “clear, definite, and unambiguous” | 3 |
| 2 | Bush Ranch, Inc. v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co. | green | “affected the rulings and the orders of the district court and interfered with the administration of justice;” | 3 |
| 3 | Bush Ranch, Inc. v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co. | green | “dupont deprived the appellees, the district court, and the jury of data and documents highly relevant to the issue which dupont itself described as the most critical issue in the case.” | 3 |
| 4 | Bush Ranch, Inc. v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co. | green | “wasted time, inconvenience, and waste of judicial resources inflicted upon the district court and the jury for the pretrial and trial of the consolidated cases.” | 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.