3 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 Scott Stevens v. Dana Meier.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Scott Stevens v. Dana Meier Anchor | green | “could readily have discovered and corrected his pleadings, but instead his misrepresentations went undetected for over a year.” | 3 |
| 2 | Scott Stevens v. Dana Meier | green | “the district court did not abuse its discretion by formally reprimanding the attorney based on the potential seriousness of his misrepresentation, the extent of his negligence, and his delays in undertaking corrective measures.” | 3 |
| 3 | McDonald v. Emory Healthcare Eye Center | green | “not elaborated on the 'akin to contempt' standard” | 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.