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 Va. Dep't of Corr. v. Jordan.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Va. Dep't of Corr. v. Jordan Anchor | green | “relevance is not, on its own, a high bar.” | 22 |
| 2 | Eramo v. Rolling Stone LLC | green | “district courts generally have broad discretion in managing discovery, including whether to grant or deny a motion to compel.” | 8 |
| 3 | Eramo v. Rolling Stone LLC | green | “resisting discovery, not the party moving to compel discovery, bears the burden of persuasion.” | 8 |
| 4 | Martin v. Bimbo Foods Bakeries Distribution, LLC | green | “while rule 26 does not define what is deemed relevant for purposes of the rule, relevance has been 'broadly construed to encompass any possibility that the information sought may be relevant to the claim or defense of any party.” | 6 |
| 5 | Eramo v. Rolling Stone LLC | green | “is of such marginal relevance that the potential harm . . . would outweigh the ordinary presumption of broad discovery.” | 6 |
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.