3 canonical passages across 3 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 Alpaugh Irrigation District v. County of Kern.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Alpaugh Irrigation District v. County of Kern Anchor | green | “being the product of appropriation and prescription as against the rights of surrounding landowners whose interests they affected . . . were not appurtenant to nor a part or parcel of appellant's lands and consequently could not be classified as improvements thereto.” | 3 |
| 2 | Morgan v. Imperial Irrigation Dist. CA4/1 | green | “silicon valley . . . does not change the substantial evidence standard of review and does not allow us to independently resolve issues of disputed fact already decided by the trial court.” | 3 |
| 3 | California Ass'n of Professional Scientists v. Department of Finance | green | “an expression of the legislature's essential duty to devise a reasonable budget” | 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.