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 8 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 Glenda Johnson v. SmithKline Beecham Corp.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Glenda Johnson v. SmithKline Beecham Corp Anchor | green | “the removal statute should be strictly construed and all doubts resolved in favor of remand.” | 5 |
| 2 | In Re Lipitor Antitrust Litigation | green | “since this case was removed to federal court, diversity must have existed both at the time the . . . plaintiffs' state court complaint was filed and at the time of removal.” | 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.