2 canonical passages across 2 cases, quoted by 7 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 Kanaszka v. Kunen.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Kanaszka v. Kunen Anchor | green | “only where the movant demonstrates substantial changes in the circumstances that existed at the time of the final hearing should the court entertain the application for dismissal.” | 4 |
| 2 | Platt v. Platt | green | “so manifestly unsupported by or inconsistent with the competent, relevant and reasonably credible evidence as to offend the interests of justice.” | 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.