8 canonical passages across 6 cases, quoted by 67 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. Pitney Bowes, Inc., Edo Corporation Plessey, Inc. Vernitron Corp., Baii Banking Corp., Movant-Appellant.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | United States v. Pitney Bowes, Inc., Edo Corporation Plessey, Inc. Vernitron Corp., Baii Banking Corp., Movant-Appellant Anchor | green | “(1) how long the applicant had notice of the interest before it made the motion to intervene; (2) prejudice to existing parties resulting from any delay; (3) prejudice to the applicant if the motion is denied; and (4) any unusual circumstances militating for or against a finding…” | 25 |
| 2 | \R\" Best Produce | green | “failure to satisfy any one of these four requirements is a sufficient ground to deny the application.” | 10 |
| 3 | Floyd v. City of New York | green | “an applicant must (1) timely file an application, (2) show an interest in the action, (3) demonstrate that the interest may be impaired by the disposition of the action, and (4) show that the interest is not protected adequately by the parties to the action.” | 8 |
| 4 | Floyd v. City of New York | green | “(1) timely file an application, (2) show an interest in the action, (3) demonstrate that the interest may be impaired by the disposition of the action, and (4) show that the interest is not protected adequately by the parties to the action.” | 6 |
| 5 | Floyd v. City of New York | green | “failure to satisfy any one of these four requirements is a sufficient ground to deny the application.” | 6 |
| 6 | Aristocrat Leisure Ltd. v. Deutsche Bank Trust Co. Americas | green | “must be mindful that each intervention case is highly fact specific and tends to resist comparison to prior cases.” | 5 |
| 7 | Seils v. Rochester City School District | green | “the moving party has the burden of demonstrating its entitlement to intervene.” | 4 |
| 8 | St. John's University v. Leslie Trager | green | “a district court has broad discretion under rule 24(b) to determine whether to permit intervention on the basis that the intervenor's claim or defense and the main action have a question of law or fact in common.” | 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.