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 3 cases, quoted by 40 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 Mayer v. City of Chicago.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Mayer v. City of Chicago Anchor | green | “record of sufficient completeness” | 14 |
| 2 | Rinaldi v. Yeager | green | “this court has never held that the states are required to establish avenues of appellate review, but it is now fundamental that, once established, these avenues must be kept free of unreasoned distinctions that can only impede open and equal access to the courts.” | 11 |
| 3 | Mayer v. City of Chicago | green | “a 'record of sufficient completeness' does not translate automatically into a complete verbatim transcript.” | 9 |
| 4 | Griffin v. Illinois | green | “means of affording adequate and effective appellate review to indigent defendants.” | 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.