3 canonical passages across 3 cases, quoted by 38 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 In Re Rawson Food Service, Inc., Debtor. Flav-O-Rich, Inc., Cross-Appellee v. Rawson Food Service, Inc., Cross-Appellant.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | In Re Rawson Food Service, Inc., Debtor. Flav-O-Rich, Inc., Cross-Appellee v. Rawson Food Service, Inc., Cross-Appellant Anchor | green | “a defense which points out a defect in the plaintiff's prima facie case is not an affirmative defense.” | 23 |
| 2 | Mladen Zivkovic v. Southern California Edison Company | green | “a defense which demonstrates that plaintiff has not met its burden of proof is not an affirmative defense.” | 11 |
| 3 | Barnes v. AT & T Pension Benefit Plannonbargained Program | green | “while neither the ninth circuit nor any other circuit courts of appeals has ruled on this issue, the vast majority of courts presented with the issue have extended twombly's heightened pleading standard to affirmative defenses.” | 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.