CitationClerk

Report

micah-68-mission-v-reynolds-metals

49 authorities checked

How this report was built

AI inference calls
0
Citations parsed
49
Sources queried
6

Cornell LII, CourtListener, Internet Archive (RECAP), State code databases, Web search republishers, govinfo

Source texts retrieved
46
Quotes checked
12

10 matched in source text

Verification runs deterministically against authoritative public databases. Your brief is not sent to OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, or any other third-party model.

Click any citation below to see how we verified it, the matched source, and a per-quote breakdown.

§Authorities

|
1 Atlantic States Legal Foundation v. Eastman Kodak Co., 12 F.3d 353 (2d Cir. 1993) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass · high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
N/A · no quotes to check
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Atlantic States Legal Foundation, Inc. v. Eastman Kodak Company”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
2 Austin v. Kroger Texas, 864 F.3d 326 (5th Cir. 2017) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass · high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
N/A · no quotes to check
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Randy Austin v. Kroger Texas, L.P”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
3 Bell v. Hood, 327 U.S. 678 (1945) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass · high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
N/A · no quotes to check
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Bell v. Hood”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
4 Carter v. Swiftships, LLC., No. 16-0370, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 35763 (W.D. La. 2018) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass · medium confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
N/A · no quotes to check
How we matched this
We couldn't independently confirm the reporter triple, but we believe this is the matching case based on CourtListener's docket index.
View matched docket on CourtListener →
5 Chevron Oronite Co., LLC v. Jacobs Field Services North America, Inc., 951 F.3d 219 (5th Cir. 2020) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass · high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
Pass· 1 of 1 located
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Chevron Oronite Company, LLC v. Jacobs Field Svcs”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
Quotes attributed to this authority
6 E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., v. Train, 430 U.S. 112 (1977) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass · high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
N/A · no quotes to check
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “E. I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co. v. Train”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
7 Evans v. Tubbe, 657 F.2d 661(5th Cir. 1981) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass · high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
Pass· 1 of 1 located
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Odie v. Evans v. Lester Tubbe”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
Quotes attributed to this authority
“patently without merit” Found word-for-word in the opinion.
8 Fragumar Corp., N.V. v. Dunlap, 685 F.2d 127 (5th Cir. 1982) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass · medium confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
Pass· 1 of 1 located
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Fragumar Corp. v. Dunlap”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
Quotes attributed to this authority
9 Gwaltney of Smithfield v. Chesapeake Bay Found., 484 U.S. 49 (1987) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass · high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
N/A · no quotes to check
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Gwaltney of Smithfield, Ltd. v. Chesapeake Bay Foundation, Inc”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
10 Hitt v. City of Pasadena, 561 F.2d 606 (5th Cir. 1977) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass · high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
N/A · no quotes to check
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Ricky D. Hitt, Kathleen Hitt and Charlott Cross v. The City of Pasadena and John Ray Harrison, Individually and as Mayor of Pasadena”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
11 In re Transtexas Gas Corp., 303 F.3d 571(5th Cir. 2002) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass · high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
N/A · no quotes to check
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts v. Transtexas Gas Corp. (In re Transtexas Gas Corp.)”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
12 Kostmayer Construction, LLC. v. Port Pipe & Tube, Inc., No. 2:16-1012, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 182864 (W.D. La. 2017) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass · medium confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
Pass· 1 of 1 located
How we matched this
We couldn't independently confirm the reporter triple, but we believe this is the matching case based on CourtListener's docket index.
View matched docket on CourtListener →
Quotes attributed to this authority
“facial attack…” Found word-for-word in the opinion.
13 McClendon v. United States, 892 F.3d 775 (5th Cir. 2018) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass · high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
N/A · no quotes to check
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Gail McClendon v. United States”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
14 Menchaca v. Chrysler Credit Corporation, 613 F. 2d 507 (5th Cir. 1980) flagged
Case exists as cited?
Pass · high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
0 of 1 located
Why we flagged this
  • At least one attributed quote wasn't located in the retrieved text.
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Tomas Menchaca and Wife, Irma Menchaca v. Chrysler Credit Corporation”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
Quotes attributed to this authority
“It is axiomatic that a district court may inquire into the basis of its subject matter jurisdiction at any state of the proceedings. A fortiori, a motion to dismiss under Fed. R. Civ. P. R. 12(b)(1) for lack of subject matter jurisdiction must include an inquiry by the court into its own jurisdiction.” The brief's quote matches 92% of the cited opinion, but in separate passages — not as one continuous quote. This typically means the brief either paraphrased inside the quotation marks (Bluebook Rule 5.2 requires brackets for any substitution) or silently omitted intervening text (Bluebook Rule 5.3 requires “. . .” for omissions). Compare the brief's quotation against the cited opinion.
What diverges
brief: …matter jurisdiction at any state of the proceedings. a fortio…
opinion: …matter jurisdiction at any stage of the proceedings. a fortio…
brief: …any state of the proceedings. a fortiori, a motion to dismiss under fed…
opinion: …any state of the proceedings. see 13 c. wright, a. miller & e. cooper, federal practice and procedure § 3522(1975). a fortiori a motion to dismiss under fed…
brief: …a motion to dismiss under fed. r. civ. p. r. 12(b)(1) for lack of subject…
opinion: …a motion to dismiss under fed.r.civ.p. 12(b)(1) for lack of subject…
15 Moody National Bank of Galveston v. GE Life & Annuity Assurance Company, 383 F.3d 249 (5th Cir. 2004) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass · high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
N/A · no quotes to check
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Moody National Bank of Galveston v. Ge Life and Annuity Assurance Company”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
16 Neitzke v. Williams, 490 U.S. 319 (1090) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass · high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
N/A · no quotes to check
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Neitzke v. Williams”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
17 Paterson v. Weinberger, 644 F.2d 521(5th Cir. 1981) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass · high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
N/A · no quotes to check
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Paterson v. Weinberger”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
18 Puget Soundkeeper All. v. Port of Tacona, 104 F. 4th 95 (9th Cir. 2024) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass · medium confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
N/A · no quotes to check
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Psa v. Port of Tacoma”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
19 Reeves v. Guiffrida, 756 F.2d 1143 (5th Cir. 1985) brief quality flagged
Case exists as cited?
Pass · medium confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
N/A · no quotes to check
Brief-quality observations
  • A case named 'Abbott J. Reeves v. Louis O. Guiffrida, Director, Federal Emergency Management Agency' exists in CourtListener at [{'volume': '1985', 'reporter': 'U.S. App. LEXIS', 'page': '28816'}, {'volume': '756', 'reporter': 'F.2d', 'page': '1141'}] (ca5, 1985), but the brief's citation does not match.
How we matched this
The brief's reporter triple is independently confirmed by leagle.com's volume index, and CourtListener's docket index identifies the same case.
20 Schiller v. Physicians Res. Group, Inc., 342 F.3d 563 (5th Cir. 2003) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass · high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
N/A · no quotes to check
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Schiller v. Physicians Resource Group Inc”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
21 SEC v. Life Partners Holdings, Inc. 854 F.3d 765 (5th Cir. 2017) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass · high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
N/A · no quotes to check
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Securities & Exchange Commission v. Life Partners Holdings, Inc”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
22 Redhawk Holdings Corporation v. Schreiber, 836 Fed. Appx. 232 (5th Cir. 2020) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass · low confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
N/A · no quotes to check
How we matched this
We couldn't independently confirm the reporter triple, but we believe this is the matching case based on CourtListener's docket index.
View matched docket on CourtListener → View opinion on GovInfo →
23 Southern Recycling, LLC v. Aguilar (In re S. Recycling, LLC), 982 F.3d 374 (5th Cir. 2020) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass · high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
Pass· 1 of 1 located
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Southern Recycling, L.L.C”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
Quotes attributed to this authority
“Because the jurisdictional question of whether DBL 134 is a vessel is antecedent to the merits in a limitation action, rather than intertwined with the merits, the district court did not err in applying the usual Rule 12(b)(1) standard and resolving factual disputes about the characteristics of the structure.” Found — the brief joined separate passages from the opinion.
24 Stem v. Gomez, 813 F.3d 205 (5th Cir. 2016) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass · high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
Pass· 1 of 1 located
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Stephen Stem v. Ruben Gomez”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
Quotes attributed to this authority
“for the purpose of obtaining jurisdiction” Found word-for-word in the opinion.
25 Sundaram v. Flagstar Bank F.S.B., No. H-12-0491, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 154024 (S.D. Tex. 2012) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass · medium confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
N/A · no quotes to check
How we matched this
We couldn't independently confirm the reporter triple, but we believe this is the matching case based on CourtListener's docket index.
View matched docket on CourtListener → View opinion on GovInfo →
26 Tellis v. LeBlanc, No. 5:18-00541, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 170541 (W.D. La. 2024) brief quality flagged
Case exists as cited?
Not verified
Opinion text retrieved?
No
Quotes found in opinion?
N/A · opinion text unavailable
Brief-quality observations
  • Brief cites this case at W.D. La., but an exact-name docket exists at M.D. La.. Could be a brief typo or a separate ruling after a venue transfer.
Why we flagged this
  • We couldn't independently verify this citation against our public sources.
  • We couldn't retrieve the source text from any of our public sources.
Why we couldn't check the quotes

We couldn't retrieve any opinion text for this citation from our public sources. The case may only be available on a paid service like Westlaw or Lexis. Without the text, we can't check whether the brief's quotes appear in the opinion.

Quotes attributed to this authority

These quotes have not been verified because the opinion text wasn't available.

the form or name of a motion is irrelevant, and that what matters is its substance.
Not verified: opinion text unavailable.
27 Templet v. HydroChem, Inc., 367 F.3d 473 (5th Cir. 2004) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass · high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
Pass· 1 of 1 located
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Templet v. Hydrochem Inc”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
Quotes attributed to this authority
28 United States v. Regeneron Pharms., Inc., 128 F.4th 324 (1 Cir. 2025) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass · medium confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
Pass· 1 of 1 located
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “United States v. Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
Quotes attributed to this authority
29 United States v. SCRAP, 412 U.S. 669 (1973) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass · high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
Pass· 1 of 1 located
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “United States v. Students Challenging Regulatory Agency Procedures (SCRAP)”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
Quotes attributed to this authority
“ingenious academic exercise in the conceivable.” Found word-for-word in the opinion.
30 Weems v. Hodnet, No. 10-cv-1452, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 75172 (W.D. La. 2011) brief quality flagged
Case exists as cited?
Pass · medium confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
Pass· 1 of 1 located
Brief-quality observations
  • Case name in the brief looks like a typo of the official record.
How we matched this
We couldn't independently confirm the reporter triple, but we believe this is the matching case based on CourtListener's docket index.
View matched docket on CourtListener →
Quotes attributed to this authority
“sur-replies often amount to little more than a strategic effort by the nonmovant to have the last word on a matter.” Found — minor punctuation or spacing differences.
31 Williams v. Monitowoc Cranes, LLC, 898 F3d 607 (5th Cir. 2018) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass · medium confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
N/A · no quotes to check
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “Wanda Williams v. The Manitowoc Company, Inc”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
32 Williamson v. Tucker, 645 F.2d 404 (5th Cir. 1981) clean
Case exists as cited?
Pass · high confidence
Opinion text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in opinion?
N/A · no quotes to check
How we matched this
The citation's reporter triple appears in CourtListener's index, matched to “John D. Williamson, Plaintiffs-Appellants-Cross v. Gordon G. Tucker, Defendants-Appellees-Cross”.
View matched opinion on CourtListener →
33 1 U.S.C. § 3 clean
Citation exists?
Pass · high confidence
Source text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in source?
N/A · no quotes to check
How we matched this
Matched on Cornell Law's online code (LII).
View text on Cornell Law (LII) →
34 33 U.S.C. §1342 clean
Citation exists?
Pass · high confidence
Source text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in source?
N/A · no quotes to check
How we matched this
Matched on Cornell Law's online code (LII).
View text on Cornell Law (LII) →
35 42 U.S.C. §11023 clean
Citation exists?
Pass · high confidence
Source text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in source?
N/A · no quotes to check
How we matched this
Matched on Cornell Law's online code (LII).
View text on Cornell Law (LII) →
36 42 U.S.C. §11041 clean
Citation exists?
Pass · high confidence
Source text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in source?
N/A · no quotes to check
How we matched this
Matched on Cornell Law's online code (LII).
View text on Cornell Law (LII) →
37 40 CFR §122.21 clean
Citation exists?
Pass · high confidence
Source text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in source?
N/A · no quotes to check
How we matched this
Matched on Cornell Law's online code (LII).
View text on Cornell Law (LII) →
38 40 CFR §136 clean
Citation exists?
Pass · high confidence
Source text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in source?
N/A · no quotes to check
How we matched this
Matched on Cornell Law's online code (LII).
View text on Cornell Law (LII) →
39 42 USC §11041 clean
Citation exists?
Pass · high confidence
Source text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in source?
N/A · no quotes to check
How we matched this
Matched on Cornell Law's online code (LII).
View text on Cornell Law (LII) →
41 1 USC §3 clean
Citation exists?
Pass · high confidence
Source text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in source?
N/A · no quotes to check
How we matched this
Matched on Cornell Law's online code (LII).
View text on Cornell Law (LII) →
42 Rule 12(b)(1) Also appears within the block quote of Southern Recycling, LLC v. Aguilar clean
Citation exists?
Pass · high confidence
Source text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in source?
N/A · no quotes to check
How we matched this
Matched on Cornell Law's online code (LII).
View text on Cornell Law (LII) →
43 Rule 12(b)(6) clean
Citation exists?
Pass · high confidence
Source text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in source?
N/A · no quotes to check
How we matched this
Matched on Cornell Law's online code (LII).
View text on Cornell Law (LII) →
44 Rule 59 clean
Citation exists?
Pass · high confidence
Source text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in source?
N/A · no quotes to check
How we matched this
Matched on Cornell Law's online code (LII).
View text on Cornell Law (LII) →
45 Rule 56 clean
Citation exists?
Pass · high confidence
Source text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in source?
N/A · no quotes to check
How we matched this
Matched on Cornell Law's online code (LII).
View text on Cornell Law (LII) →
46 Local Rule 7.1 manual verify
Citation exists?
Not verified
Source text retrieved?
No
Quotes found in source?
N/A · no quotes to check
Please verify this one manually

This citation falls outside our automated coverage. Law reviews, treatises, restatements, and legislative packages predating govinfo's collection window don't have a free full-text source we can reliably retrieve. The citation itself looks well-formed; a reviewer with access to HeinOnline, Westlaw, Lexis, or a law library can confirm. This isn't a defect in the citation; it's a coverage gap in our automated sources.

47 Rule 59(e) clean
Citation exists?
Pass · high confidence
Source text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in source?
N/A · no quotes to check
How we matched this
Matched on Cornell Law's online code (LII).
View text on Cornell Law (LII) →
48 Local Rule 7 manual verify
Citation exists?
Not verified
Source text retrieved?
No
Quotes found in source?
N/A · no quotes to check
Please verify this one manually

This citation falls outside our automated coverage. Law reviews, treatises, restatements, and legislative packages predating govinfo's collection window don't have a free full-text source we can reliably retrieve. The citation itself looks well-formed; a reviewer with access to HeinOnline, Westlaw, Lexis, or a law library can confirm. This isn't a defect in the citation; it's a coverage gap in our automated sources.

49 Rule 12 clean
Citation exists?
Pass · high confidence
Source text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in source?
N/A · no quotes to check
How we matched this
Matched on Cornell Law's online code (LII).
View text on Cornell Law (LII) →
50 Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure clean
Citation exists?
Pass · high confidence
Source text retrieved?
Yes
Quotes found in source?
N/A · no quotes to check
How we matched this
Matched on Cornell Law's online code (LII).
View text on Cornell Law (LII) →
§Record & filing references (20)

Citations to filings in this case or its record — appendices, docket entries, pleadings. These aren't published authority, so we don't retrieve or verify them. They're listed here so every citation in the brief is accounted for.

Doc. 1 docket filing not verified
Doc. 25 docket filing not verified
Quoted language the brief sources to this reference (not to a cited case):
  • Whatever may be the purpose of Rule 59(e), it should not be supposed that it is intended to give an unhappy litigant one additional chance to sway the judge.
https://deq.louisiana.gov/assets/docs/Permits/Implementation_Procedures_Version_10.pdf web source not verified
Doc. 10 docket filing not verified
Doc. 26 docket filing not verified
Doc. 31 docket filing not verified
Doc. 11-1 docket filing not verified
Doc. 23 docket filing not verified
Doc. 18 docket filing not verified
Doc. 19 docket filing not verified
Doc. 31-1 docket filing not verified
Doc 1, ¶42 docket filing not verified
Footnote 14 footnote not verified
Footnote 17 footnote not verified
Footnote 18 footnote not verified
Footnote 19 footnote not verified
Footnote 20 footnote not verified
Footnote 21 footnote not verified
Footnote 22 footnote not verified
Footnote 23 footnote not verified

Sent this report by a friend?

Try your own brief.

Submit a brief →

First 3 briefs free