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 In Re 1999 Upset Sale of Real Estate.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | In Re 1999 Upset Sale of Real Estate Anchor | green | “our review is limited to determining whether the trial court abused its discretion, clearly erred as a matter of law, or rendered a decision unsupported by the evidence.” | 4 |
| 2 | Husak v. Fayette County Tax Claim Bureau | green | “the purpose of tax sales is not to strip the taxpayer of his property but to insure the collection of taxes.” | 4 |
| 3 | Consolidated Reports & Return by the Tax Claims Bureau of Northumberland County of Properties | green | “the requirements of section 601(a)(3) are cumulative and apply in addition to tax claim bureaus' obligations to provide notice through publications, posting, and mail.” | 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.