7 canonical passages across 6 cases, quoted by 39 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 Porter Brown Limestone Co. v. Olson.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Porter Brown Limestone Co. v. Olson Anchor | green | “cannot work an estoppel against the state.” | 9 |
| 2 | Commonwealth v. Meyers | green | “repeals by implication are not favored” | 5 |
| 3 | Commonwealth v. Provident Trust Co. | green | “repeals by implication are not favored, and, before it is so held, the repugnance between the two acts must be total.” | 5 |
| 4 | New England Mut. Life Ins. v. Reece | green | “the weight of the decided cases rather favors the insurance company.” | 5 |
| 5 | New England Mut. Life Ins. v. Reece | green | “notwithstanding the longevity of these laws in both states, in 2009, the department abruptly reversed its long-standing position of not assessing retaliatory taxes against the pennsylvania surcharges.” | 5 |
| 6 | Republic Insurance Co. v. Oakley | green | “purpose of the retaliatory insurance tax statute . . . is to protect tennessee insurance companies by encouraging foreign jurisdictions not to impose heavier burdens on tennessee companies than tennessee imposes upon their companies who come here to do business.” | 5 |
| 7 | Somerset & Stoystown Road | green | “repeals by implication are not favored, and, before it is so held, the repugnance between the two acts must be total.” | 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.