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 3 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 Kruso v. International Telephone & Telegraph Corp..
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Kruso v. International Telephone & Telegraph Corp. Anchor | green | “plaintiffs are unable to state 10 a claim against defendants for any of the wrongs alleged in their complaint” | 4 |
| 2 | Mexia v. Rinker Boat Co., Inc. | green | “in order to prove a breach of the implied warranty, the purchaser was required to show 25 that the defect existed at the time the product was sold or delivered.” | 4 |
| 3 | Good v. Prudential Insurance Co. of America | green | “that there is no possibility that the plaintiff will be able 6 to establish a cause of action in state court against the alleged sham defendant.” | 4 |
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.