2 canonical passages across 2 cases, quoted by 6 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 In Re Livent, Inc. Noteholders Securities Litig..
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | In Re Livent, Inc. Noteholders Securities Litig. Anchor | green | “court need not feel constrained to accept as truth conflicting pleadings that make no sense, or that would render a claim incoherent, or that are contradicted either by statements in the complaint itself or by documents upon which its pleadings rely.” | 3 |
| 2 | Response Personnel, Inc. v. Hartford Fire Insurance | green | “the parties' briefs assume that new york law controls. therefore, under the new york choice-of-law rule, new york law applies.” | 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.