5 canonical passages across 3 cases, quoted by 50 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 Pannu v. Iolab Corp..
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Pannu v. Iolab Corp. Anchor | green | “must show that the jury's findings, presumed or express, are not supported by substantial evidence or, if they were, that the legal conclusion(s) implied by the jury's verdict cannot in law be supported by those findings.” | 14 |
| 2 | The Perkin-Elmer Corporation, a Corporation of New York v. Computervision Corporation, a Corporation of Delaware | green | “substantial' evidence is such relevant evidence from the record taken as a whole as might be accepted by a reasonable mind as adequate to support the finding under review.” | 13 |
| 3 | Pannu v. Iolab Corp. | green | “to prevail on a renewed motion for jmol following a jury trial, a party must show that the jury's findings, presumed or express, are not supported by substantial evidence or, if they were, that the legal conclusion(s) implied by the jury's verdict cannot in law be supported by t…” | 12 |
| 4 | Fireman's Fund Insurance Co., in No. 75-2405 v. Videfreeze Corporation, and David E. Chinnery Development Corp., Inno. 75-2406 | green | “there is insufficient evidence for permitting any different finding.” | 8 |
| 5 | Fireman's Fund Insurance Co., in No. 75-2405 v. Videfreeze Corporation, and David E. Chinnery Development Corp., Inno. 75-2406 | green | “insufficient evidence for permitting any different finding.” | 3 |
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.