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 Franchise Developers, Inc. v. City of Cincinnati.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Franchise Developers, Inc. v. City of Cincinnati Anchor | green | “there remains a debatable constitutional question to resolve.” | 6 |
| 2 | State ex rel. Beacon Journal Publishing Co. v. Donaldson | green | “this exception applies only in exceptional circumstances in which the following two factors are both present: (1) the challenged action is too short in its duration to be fully litigated before its cessation or expiration, and (2) there is a reasonable expectation that the same …” | 6 |
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.