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 11 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 Pathak v. Department of Veterans Affairs.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Pathak v. Department of Veterans Affairs Anchor | green | “persuasive evidence that congress deliberately intended to foreclose further review of such claims.” | 4 |
| 2 | Steeltech, Ltd. v. United States Environmental Protection Agency | green | “appropriate standard of review” | 4 |
| 3 | Uhi, Inc., D/B/A University Hospital v. Tommy G. Thompson, Secretary of Health and Human Services | green | “wary of interpreting the apa in a manner that precludes any judicial review of agency decisions, requiring a 'showing of clear and convincing evidence' that congress intended to eliminate judicial review in matters of agency discretion.” | 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.