3 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 Rosell v. Esco.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Rosell v. Esco Anchor | green | “where there is conflict in the testimony, reasonable evaluations of credibility and reasonable inferences of fact should not be disturbed upon review, even though the appellate court may feel that its own evaluations and inferences are as reasonable.” | 26 |
| 2 | Rosell v. Esco | green | “where there are two permissible views of the evidence, the factfinder's choice between them cannot be manifestly erroneous or clearly wrong.” | 25 |
| 3 | Keller v. Monteleon Hotel | green | “where there is conflict in the testimony, reasonable evaluations of credibility and reasonable inferences of fact should not be disturbed upon review, even though the appellate court may feel that its own evaluations and inferences are as reasonable.” | 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.