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.
4 canonical passages across 3 cases, quoted by 81 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 Town of Hallie v. City of Eau Claire.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Town of Hallie v. City of Eau Claire Anchor | green | “demonstrate that their anticompetitive activities were authorized by the state 'pursuant to state policy to displace competition with regulation or monopoly public service.” | 37 |
| 2 | Town of Hallie v. City of Eau Claire | green | “it is engaging in the challenged activity pursuant to a clearly expressed state policy.” | 25 |
| 3 | Rice v. Norman Williams Co. | green | “conduct contemplated by the statute is in all cases a per se violation.” | 14 |
| 4 | Lease Lights, Inc. v. Public Service Company Of Oklahoma | green | “the constitutional invalidity of the attempted state regulation is not an appropriate basis for disregarding state action immunity.” | 5 |
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.