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.
7 canonical passages across 6 cases, quoted by 57 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 Ramirez v. Puerto Rico Fire Service.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ramirez v. Puerto Rico Fire Service Anchor | green | “puerto rico, despite the lack of formal statehood, enjoys the shelter of the eleventh amendment in all respects.” | 12 |
| 2 | Edwards v. HOVENSA, LLC | green | “we see no reason not to incorporate the federalism principles applicable throughout the circuit into our relationship with the virgin islands courts.” | 9 |
| 3 | Edwards v. HOVENSA, LLC | green | “now that 1613 mandates that the relations between courts established by laws of the united states, e.g., the revised organic act, and courts established by local law should mirror the relations between state and federal courts, we conclude that 1613 makes the erie doctrine and…” | 8 |
| 4 | Bluebeard's Castle, Inc. Castle Acquisitions, Inc. v. Government of the Virgin Islands Roy Martin, in His Official Capacity as Tax Assessor | green | “partially a federal tax system, and it is not apparent that the federal government should adopt a hands-off approach to the federal aspects of a hybrid federal/territorial system.” | 7 |
| 5 | Tice v. Wilson | green | “the scope of the court's review is far more limited and is conducted under the far more deferential standard of 'plain error'.” | 7 |
| 6 | Z & R Cab, LLC v. Philadelphia Parking Authority | green | “whether: (1) the challenged law concerned 'commercial matters over which' the state 'enjoys wide regulatory latitude'; (2) the suit requires adjudicating 'any fundamental right or classification' to which heightened scrutiny applies; (3) the state courts are 'better positioned t…” | 7 |
| 7 | Robinson Protective Alarm Co. v. City of Philadelphia | green | “anticipatory federal adjudication will clearly interfere with the city's collection of its revenues.” | 7 |
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.