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.
4 canonical passages across 2 cases, quoted by 48 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 Hessami v. MSPB.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Hessami v. MSPB Anchor | green | “sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to state a claim that is plausible on its face.” | 36 |
| 2 | John Edwards v. Department of Labor | green | “cooperating with or disclosing information to the inspector general of an agency, or the special counsel, in accordance with applicable provisions of law,” | 5 |
| 3 | Hessami v. MSPB | green | “the question of whether the appellant has non-frivolously alleged protected disclosures that contributed to a personnel action must be determined based on whether the employee alleged sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to state a claim that is plausible on its face.” | 4 |
| 4 | Hessami v. MSPB | green | “must be determined based on whether the employee alleged sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to state a claim that is plausible on its face.” | 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.