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.
4 canonical passages across 2 cases, quoted by 86 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 Ailes v. Portland Meadows, Inc..
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ailes v. Portland Meadows, Inc. Anchor | green | “the competing interests of the parties; the nature of the case; the gravity of the error; the ends of justice in the particular case; how the error came to the court's attention; and whether the policies behind the general rule requiring preservation of error have been served in…” | 37 |
| 2 | State v. Pendergrapht | green | “a court cannot impose fees based on pure speculation that a defendant has funds to pay the fees or may acquire them in the future.” | 17 |
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.