Find every case an opinion relies on, and how it uses each one
An opinion leans on earlier decisions in different ways: it follows some, distinguishes others on their facts, and occasionally declines to follow or criticizes a line of cases. Ask Search+ which precedents the court cites and how it treats each, and open the cited passage to see the case in context rather than in a bare list.
Creating an account needs no payment.
Last updated October 2026
How to trace precedents with Search+
- Upload the opinion, and key precedents if you have them
Add the opinion. If you also upload the main cases it cites, you can ask whether the opinion describes them accurately and get citations to both.
- Ask how each case is used
Ask "Which cases does the court follow, and which does it distinguish?" Then ask about one precedent at a time, such as "Why does the court say the earlier case does not apply here?"
- Read the signals and the context
Open each citation and read the surrounding sentences. Introductory words before a citation often indicate whether the case directly supports the point or only offers a comparison.
Questions about cited precedents
Which three cases does the majority rely on most, and for what propositions?
Which cases does the court distinguish, and on what facts?
Does the opinion decline to follow or criticize any earlier decision?
Do the majority and the dissent rely on different precedents for the same point?
Does the court cite treatises, statutes or articles alongside the cases?
What to check when tracing precedents
A case cited for support and a case cited to be set aside look similar in a list. The sentence around the citation tells you which.
Words placed before a citation in legal writing indicate how strongly the case supports the point. Read them as part of the citation.
Opinions often cite a specific page of an earlier case. That page is the passage the court is relying on, which is worth reading in the original.
Whether a cited case binds the deciding court depends on the court hierarchy and the jurisdiction. Search+ does not make that call.
Search+ cites the opinion's own excerpt for every precedent it reports, so you can see how and where the case was used.
Precedent wording and what it signals
| Wording you may see | What it usually signals | A follow-up question |
|---|---|---|
| "we are bound by" | The court treats the case as controlling | Which issue does that case control? |
| "is distinguishable" | The court sets the case aside on its facts | Which facts does the court say are different? |
| "we decline to follow" | The court rejects the earlier reasoning | What reason does the court give? |
| "see" or "cf." before a citation | Support or analogy of varying strength | What point is the case cited for? |
| "overruled" or "abrogated" | The earlier case lost its authority | Does the court say this itself or describe another court doing it? |
What are cited precedents in a court opinion?
Cited precedents are the earlier judicial decisions an opinion refers to, whether to rely on their reasoning, to show the present case is different, or to explain why the court will not follow them.
Questions about cited precedents
Can Search+ list the cases an opinion cites?
Will it tell me which cases the court distinguished?
Can it check whether the opinion describes a precedent accurately?
Does it tell me whether a cited case is still good law?
Can I treat its list of precedents as legal research?
See exactly how the court used each case
Start a workspace, upload the opinion, and ask which precedents it relies on and why.
Start a workspace