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 Catskill Mountains Chapter of Trout Unlimited, Inc. v. United States Environmental Protection Agency.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Catskill Mountains Chapter of Trout Unlimited, Inc. v. United States Environmental Protection Agency Anchor | green | “the basic goal is to avoid prejudice.” | 4 |
| 2 | Rodriguez v. Gusman | green | “a district court possesses inherent authority to control the disposition of the causes on its docket and has power to stay an action as an incident of that authority.” | 4 |
| 3 | Kamdem-Ouaffo v. Pepsico, Inc. | green | “would interfere with the proceedings, delay rather than expedite the disposition of these cases and increasee expense to the parties.” | 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.