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.
15 canonical passages across 15 cases, quoted by 2,399 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 Sparrow, Victor H. v. United Airlines Inc.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Sparrow, Victor H. v. United Airlines Inc Anchor | green | “treat the complaint's factual allegations as true ... and must grant plaintiff 'the benefit of all inferences that can be derived from the facts alleged.” | 618 |
| 2 | Gustave-Schmidt v. Chao | green | “the facts alleged in the complaint, documents attached as exhibits or incorporated by reference in the complaint, and matters about which the court may take judicial notice.” | 359 |
| 3 | Scolaro v. District of Columbia Bd. of Elections and Ethics | green | “a court may consider such materials outside the pleadings as it deems appropriate to resolve the question of whether it has jurisdiction to hear the case.” | 332 |
| 4 | General Motors Corp. v. Environmental Protection Agency | green | “as a court of limited jurisdiction, we begin, and end, with an examination of our jurisdiction.” | 277 |
| 5 | Akinseye v. District of Columbia | green | “because subject-matter jurisdiction is 'an article iii as well as a statutory requirement . . . no action of the parties can confer subject-matter jurisdiction upon a federal court.” | 200 |
| 6 | Victor Herbert v. National Academy of Sciences | green | “where necessary, the court may consider the complaint supplemented by undisputed facts evidenced in the record, or the complaint supplemented by undisputed facts plus the court's resolution of disputed facts.” | 189 |
| 7 | William Hohri v. United States | red | “is not limited to the allegations of the complaint.” | 159 |
| 8 | Empagran S.A. v. F. Hoffman-LaRoche, Ltd. | red | “it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his claim which would entitle him to relief.” | 60 |
| 9 | Grand Lodge of the Fraternal Order of Police v. Ashcroft | green | “need not limit itself to the allegations of the complaint.” | 53 |
| 10 | Arizona Christian School Tuition Organization v. Winn | green | “to state a case or controversy under article iii, a plaintiff must establish standing.” | 43 |
| 11 | NetworkIP, LLC v. Federal Communications Commission | green | “forbidden . . . from acting beyond our authority,” | 42 |
| 12 | Warren v. District of Columbia | green | “the accepted rule in every type of case” | 33 |
| 13 | Artis v. Greenspan | green | “a court may consider material outside of the pleadings in ruling on a motion to dismiss for lack of venue, personal jurisdiction or subject- matter jurisdiction.).” | 15 |
| 14 | El Paso Natural Gas Company v. United States | green | “as subject matter jurisdiction presents a threshold question.” | 10 |
| 15 | Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. St. Francis Xavier Parochial School and St. Francis Xavier Church | green | “matters of which it may take judicial notice.” | 9 |
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.