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.
2 canonical passages across 2 cases, quoted by 9 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 Caremark Therapeutic Services v. Leavitt.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Caremark Therapeutic Services v. Leavitt Anchor | green | “a federal agency does not reside in a district merely by virtue of having an office in that district.” | 5 |
| 2 | Reuben H. Donnelley Corporation v. Federal Trade Commission | green | “venue with respect to a federal officer or employee is proper in the place of his or her official residence, where his or her official duties are performed.” | 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.