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.
6 canonical passages across 4 cases, quoted by 93 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 Occupy Columbia v. Nikki Haley.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Occupy Columbia v. Nikki Haley Anchor | green | “a motion for judgment on the pleadings under rule 12(c) is assessed under the same standards as a motion to dismiss under rule 12(b)(6).” | 39 |
| 2 | Occupy Columbia v. Nikki Haley | green | “under the same standards as a motion to dismiss under rule 12(b)(6).” | 20 |
| 3 | Monroe v. City of Charlottesville, Va. | green | “however, the court need not accept the legal conclusions drawn from the facts, and need not accept as true unwarranted inferences, unreasonable conclusions, or arguments.” | 13 |
| 4 | Feminist Majority Foundation v. Richard Hurley | green | “obliged to accept the complaint's factual allegations as true and draw all reasonable inferences in favor of the plaintiffs.” | 12 |
| 5 | Monroe v. City of Charlottesville, Va. | green | “the court need not accept the legal conclusions drawn from the facts, and need not accept as true unwarranted inferences, unreasonable conclusions, or arguments.” | 5 |
| 6 | Barefoot v. Polk | green | “it appears beyond doubt that the litigant can prove no set of facts in support of his claim that would entitle him to relief.” | 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.