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 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 North v. North.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | North v. North Anchor | green | “clearly untenable, unfairly depriving a litigant of a substantial right and denying a just result,” | 5 |
| 2 | Attorney Grievance Commission v. Noonan | green | “the notion that a ruling reviewed under an abuse of discretion standard will not be reversed simply because the appellate court would not have made the same ruling.” | 2 |
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.