5 canonical passages across 3 cases, quoted by 91 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 Mitseff v. Wheeler.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Mitseff v. Wheeler Anchor | green | “meaningful opportunity to respond.” | 39 |
| 2 | Mitseff v. Wheeler | green | “a party seeking summary judgment must specifically delineate the basis upon which summary judgment is sought in order to allow the opposing party a meaningful opportunity to respond.” | 26 |
| 3 | Jacobs v. Racevskis | green | “weigh evidence or choose among reasonable inferences .” | 15 |
| 4 | Adkins v. Chief Supermarket, Unpublished Decision (2-26-2007) | green | “when the requirements of civ.r. 56(c) are met.” | 8 |
| 5 | Jacobs v. Racevskis | green | “meaningful opportunity to respond.” | 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.