4 canonical passages across 3 cases, quoted by 30 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 Pollnow v. Glennon.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Pollnow v. Glennon Anchor | green | “violation of state law is not cognizable under 1983.” | 11 |
| 2 | Kevin Holcomb v. Mark Lykens, Sean Smith, Joanne Pereria and John Gorczyk | green | “tate statutes do not create federally protected due process entitlements to specific state-mandated procedures.” | 8 |
| 3 | Pollnow v. Glennon | green | “clearly, a violation of state law is not cognizable under 1983.” | 6 |
| 4 | Rivera v. Wohlrab | green | “violations of state law procedural requirements do not alone constitute a deprivation of due process since federal constitutional standards rather than state law define the requirements of procedural due process.” | 5 |
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.