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.
2 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 Brandie Cunningham v. Wood County.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Brandie Cunningham v. Wood County Anchor | green | “the 'clearly established' prong is difficult to satisfy.” | 9 |
| 2 | Ramirez v. Killian | green | “officers sued in a civil action for damages under 42 u.s.c. 1983 have the same right to fair notice as do defendants charged with the criminal offense defined in 18 u.s.c. 242 .” | 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.