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 10 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 Miller v. Eighteenth Judicial District Court.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Miller v. Eighteenth Judicial District Court Anchor | green | “forfeiture,' as opposed to 'waiver,' is the correct term in this context, since 'forfeiture' refers to 'the failure to make the timely assertion of a right,' whereas 'waiver' concerns 'the intentional relinquishment or abandonment of a known right.” | 4 |
| 2 | Silva v. City of Columbia Falls | green | “a decision is arbitrary if it appears to be 'random, unreasonable, or seemingly unmotivated, based on the existing record.” | 3 |
| 3 | In Re TE | green | “in order to preserve a claim or objection for appeal, an appellant must first raise that specific claim or objection in the lower court” | 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.