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 136 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 Hickson Corp. v. Northern Crossarm Co..
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Hickson Corp. v. Northern Crossarm Co. Anchor | green | “a court must decide 'whether the evidence presents a sufficient disagreement to require submission to a jury or whether it is so one-sided that one party must prevail as a matter of law.” | 69 |
| 2 | Warrior Tombigbee Transportation Company, Inc. v. M/v Nan Fung Etc., John K. Irish, Inc. | green | “may be inappropriate even where the parties agree on the basic facts, but disagree about the factual inferences that should be drawn from these facts” | 63 |
| 3 | Haasbroek v. Princess Cruise Lines, Ltd. | green | “when a party fails to address a specific claim, or fails to respond to an argument made by the opposing party, the court deems such claim or argument abandoned.” | 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.