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 2 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 Virgil Johnson and Virgil Johnson Trucking v. Associated Milk Producers, Inc..
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Virgil Johnson and Virgil Johnson Trucking v. Associated Milk Producers, Inc. Anchor | green | “summary judgment is proper if the only issue is the legal consequences flowing from undisputed facts.” | 4 |
| 2 | Hill Ex Rel. Hill v. State, Department of Human Services | green | “the proper vehicle to test the validity of the claims . . . and we need only decide whether the district court properly applied the law.” | 3 |
| 3 | Virgil Johnson and Virgil Johnson Trucking v. Associated Milk Producers, Inc. | green | “the proper vehicle to test the validity of the claims . . . and we need only decide whether the district court properly applied the law.” | 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.