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.
5 canonical passages across 3 cases, quoted by 60 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 Star Centers, Inc. v. Faegre & Benson, L.L.P..
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Star Centers, Inc. v. Faegre & Benson, L.L.P. Anchor | green | “we view the evidence in the light most favorable to the party against whom summary judgment was granted.” | 35 |
| 2 | Star Centers, Inc. v. Faegre & Benson, L.L.P. | green | “whether there are any genuine issues of material fact and whether the district court erred in its application of the law.” | 10 |
| 3 | Star Centers, Inc. v. Faegre & Benson, L.L.P. | green | “view the evidence in the light most favorable to the party against whom summary judgment was granted.” | 6 |
| 4 | Doe v. Archdiocese of Saint Paul & Minneapolis | green | “present specific admissible facts showing a material fact issue.” | 5 |
| 5 | Montemayor v. Sebright Products, Inc. | green | “we review the grant of summary judgment de novo to determine whether there are genuine issues of material fact and whether the district court erred in its application of the law.” | 4 |
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.