Wheeler v. Mo Dir. of Revenue, 549 U.S. 1266 (2007). · Go Syfert
Search
Wheeler v. Mo Dir. of Revenue, 549 U.S. 1266 (2007). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
33 citation events (33 in the last 25 years) across 3 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: In re Alizabeth L.-T. (connappct, 2022-06-29)
Treatment trajectory · 2007 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2007 2016 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 5 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited "see" In re Alizabeth L.-T.
Conn. App. Ct. · 2022 · signal: see · confidence high
See Prentice v. Dalco Electric, Inc., 280 Conn. 336, 358 , 907 A.2d 1204 (2006) (holding that standard in civil case for determin- ing whether evidentiary ruling was harmful is whether ‘‘ruling [likely] would [have] affect[ed] the result’’ and citing Swenson v. Sawoska, 215 Conn. 148, 153 , 575 A.2d 206 (1990), as having rejected standard ‘‘that would have required treating as harmless error any evidentiary ruling, regardless of its effect upon verdict, so long as evidence not implicated by ruling was sufficient as matter of law to sustain verdict’’ (internal quotation marks om…
discussed Cited "see" State v. Calabrese (2×)
Conn. App. Ct. · 2009 · signal: see · confidence high
See Prentice v. Dalco Electric, Inc., 280 Conn. 336 , 339 n.3, 907 A.2d 1204 (2006), cert. denied, 549 U.S. 1266 , 127 S. Ct. 1494 , 167 L.
cited Cited "see" State v. Collins
Conn. App. Ct. · 2008 · signal: see · confidence high
See Prentice v. Dalco Electric, Inc., 280 Conn. 336 , 339 n.3, 907 A.2d 1204 (2006), cert. denied, 549 U.S. 1266 , 127 S. Ct. 1494 , 167 L.
discussed Cited "see" Hayes v. Camel
Conn. · 2007 · signal: accord · confidence high
Finally, the standard in a civil case for determining whether an improper ruling was harmful is whether the . . . ruling [likely] would [have] affect[ed] the result.” 15 (Citations omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) Ryan Transportation, Inc. v. M & G Associates, 266 Conn. 520, 530 , 832 A.2d 1180 (2003); accord Prentice v. Dalco Electric, Inc., 280 *489 Conn. 336, 358, 907 A.2d 1204 (2006) (same), cert. denied, 549 U.S. 1266 , 127 S. Ct. 1494 , 167 Ed. 2d 230 (2007); Dinan v. Marchand, 279 Conn. 558, 567 , 903 A.2d 201 (2006) (same).
discussed Cited "see" State v. Saucier
Conn. · 2007 · signal: see · confidence high
See generally Prentice v. Dalco Electric, Inc., 280 Conn. 336, 347 , 907 A.2d 1204 (2006) (trial court’s admission of scientific expert opinion testimony without Porter hearing to assess validity of underlying methodology), cert. denied, 549 U.S. 1266 , 127 S. Ct. 1494 , 167 L.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
ROBERT J. WHEELER
v.
MO DIR. OF REVENUE
06-1054.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Mar 5, 2007.
549 U.S. 1266
Published

The petition for a writ of certiorari is denied.