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 3 cases, quoted by 85 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 Nereida Mendez v. Republic Bank.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Nereida Mendez v. Republic Bank Anchor | green | “based on an independent review of the evidence and arguments without giving any presumptive weight to the magistrate judge's conclusion.” | 34 |
| 2 | Nereida Mendez v. Republic Bank | green | “may accept, reject or modify the magistrate judge's recommended decision.” | 27 |
| 3 | Barbara Castile v. Michael Astrue | green | “such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion.” | 21 |
| 4 | Left Field Media LLC v. City of Chicago | green | “the district judge makes the ultimate decision to adopt, reject, or modify the magistrate judge's recommendation.” | 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.