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.
2 canonical passages across 2 cases, quoted by 63 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 City of Milwaukee v. Cement Division, National Gypsum Co..
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | City of Milwaukee v. Cement Division, National Gypsum Co. Anchor | green | “the essential rationale for awarding prejudgment interest is to ensure that an injured party is fully compensated for its loss.” | 57 |
| 2 | McRoberts Software, Inc. v. Media 100, Inc., Cross-Appellee | green | “prejudgment interest is presumptively available to victims of federal law violations.” | 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.