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 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 United States v. McClellan Chatman.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | United States v. McClellan Chatman Anchor | green | “the lack of a cross-reference is all the more significant because so many of the guidelines use explicit cross-referencing” | 3 |
| 2 | United States v. Anthony R. Weddle, United States of America v. Anthony R. Weddle | green | “the seventh circuit's poff decision and the d.c. circuit's chatman decision provide the only detailed analyses of the issue presented” | 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.