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.
2 canonical passages across 2 cases, quoted by 55 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 Berger v. Berger.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Berger v. Berger Anchor | green | “a party abandons a claim when it fails to make a meaningful argument in support of its position.” | 45 |
| 2 | MacK v. City of Detroit | green | “addressing a controlling legal issue despite the failure of the parties to properly frame the issue is a well understood judicial principle.” | 10 |
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.