7 canonical passages across 4 cases, quoted by 58 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 Vangsness v. Vangsness.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Vangsness v. Vangsness Anchor | green | “that the record might support findings other than those made by the district court does not show that the court's findings are defective.” | 18 |
| 2 | Marriage of Pikula v. Pikula | red | “appellate review of custody determinations is limited to whether the district court abused its discretion by making findings unsupported by the evidence or by improperly applying the law.” | 13 |
| 3 | Vangsness v. Vangsness | green | “leaves scant if any room for an appellate court to question the district court's balancing of best-interests considerations.” | 13 |
| 4 | Vangsness v. Vangsness | green | “scant if any room for an appellate court to question the district court's balancing of best-interests considerations.” | 5 |
| 5 | Marriage of Goldman v. Greenwood | green | “is limited to considering whether the district court abused its discretion by making findings unsupported by the evidence or by improperly applying the law.” | 4 |
| 6 | Marriage of Goldman v. Greenwood | green | “set aside a district court's findings of fact only if clearly erroneous, giving deference to the district court's opportunity to evaluate witness credibility.” | 3 |
| 7 | Putz v. Putz | green | “against logic and the facts on record.” | 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.