Treatment trajectory · 1939 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1939
1982
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 10 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "see"
Wisenbaker v. State
See United States v. Wadley, 59 F.3d 510, 512-13 (5th Cir.1995), cert. denied, 519 U.S. 895 , 117 S.Ct. 240 , 136 L.Ed.2d 169 (1996); Arnold v. State, 831 S.W.2d 556, 559 (Tex. App.-Austin 1992, pet. ref'd).
discussed
Cited "see"
Perry Center, Inc. v. Heitkamp
See Wishnatsky v. Bergquist, 550 N.W.2d 394, 403 (N.D.), cert. denied, - U.S. -, 117 S.Ct. 240 , 136 L.Ed.2d 169 (1996). [¶ 35] In this case, not only did Perry Center fail to plead Wessman acted with required culpability, but no reasonable fact-finder could find from the evidence in the record his conduct rose to the level of recklessness, gross negligence, malfeasance, or willful or wanton misconduct.
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Melvin Henning
See Vargas v. Keane, 86 F.3d 1273, 1277 (2nd Cir.), cert. denied, -- U.S. --, 117 S.Ct. 240 (1996).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Lavell Wallace
See United States v. Wadley, 59 F.3d 510, 512-13 (5th Cir.1995) (“in combination with other facts and circumstances, flight from an officer may create probable 'cause where the defendant persistently attempts to evade capture”), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 117 S.Ct. 240 , 136 L.Ed.2d 169 (1996).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Alejandro
See, e.g., Vargas v. Keane, 86 F.3d 1273, 1275, 1278-79 (2d Cir.) (upholding a jury instruction that a reasonable doubt is “a doubt for which you can give a reason if called upon to do so by a fellow juror in the jury room”), cert. denied, 519 U.S. 895 , 117 S.Ct. 240 , 136 L.Ed.2d 169 (1996); Chalmers, 73 F.3d at 1266 (upholding the district court’s charge to the jury that a reasonable doubt is “a doubt for which some good reason can be given”). “[J]ury instructions that imply that jurors should be ready to give a reason for their doubts are not approved and [are] perhaps unwise b…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Davis v. Strack
The challenged instruction is not to be viewed in isolation, but “in the context of the overall charge.” Cupp v. Naughten, 414 U.S. at 147 , 94 S.Ct. at 400 ; see also, e.g., Vargas v. Keane, 86 F.3d 1273, 1277 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 519 U.S. 895 , 117 S.Ct. 240 , 136 L.Ed.2d 169 (1996); Bramble v. Smith, 96 Civ. 5905, 1998 WL 395265 at *17 (S.D.N.Y.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Gillette v. Greiner
The challenged instruction is not to be viewed in isolation, but “in the context of the overall charge.” Cupp v. Naughten, 414 U.S. at 147 , 94 S.Ct. at 400 ; see also, e.g., Vargas v. Keane, 86 F.3d 1273, 1277 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 519 U.S. 895 , 117 S.Ct. 240 , 136 L.Ed.2d 169 (1996); Bramble v. Smith, 96 Civ. 5905, 1998 WL 395265 at *17 (S.D.N.Y.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Tillman v. Cook
As recent cases in this Circuit have demon *1266 strated, however, the term is “perhaps one of the least susceptible to verbal formulation.” United States v. Birbal, 62 F.3d 456, 457 (2d Cir.1995); see, e.g., Vargas v. Keane, 86 F.3d 1273, 1280 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 117 S.Ct. 240 , 136 L.Ed.2d 169 (1996); Chalmers v. Mitchell, 73 F.3d 1262, 1266 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 117 S.Ct. 106 , 136 L.Ed.2d 60 (1996).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Beddow, Unpublished Decision (3-20-1998)
See, e.g. , State v. Wogenstahl (1996), 75 Ohio St.3d 344 , 364 , certiorari denied (1996), — U.S. ___, 117 S.Ct. 240 , 136 L.Ed.2d 169 ; State v. Butler (1994), 97 Ohio App.3d 322 , 325-26 ; State v. Mann (April 28, 1992), Montgomery App. No. 12685, at 4; State v. Broadnax (Dec. 14, 1995), Cuyahoga App. Nos. 67360, 67361, at 3.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
James Beverly v. Hans Walker, Superintendent of Auburn Correctional Facility
As recent cases in this Circuit have demonstrated, however, the term is “perhaps one of the least susceptible to verbal formulation.” United States v. Birbal, 62 F.3d 456, 457 (2d Cir.1995); see, e.g., Vargas v. Keane, 86 F.3d 1273, 1280 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 117 S.Ct. 240 , 136 L.Ed.2d 169 (1996); Chalmers v. Mitchell, 73 F.3d 1262, 1266 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 117 S.Ct. 106 , 136 L.Ed.2d 60 (1996).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Cunningham
v.
Atlantic Coast Lumber Corporation Et Al.
v.
Atlantic Coast Lumber Corporation Et Al.
Supreme Court of South Carolina.
Oct 10, 1921.
Mr. J.O. O'Bryan , for appellant, cites: Evidence of negotiations at time contract was made is admissible: 98 S.C. 8 ; 108 S.C. 108 . Where no definite time is fixed to commence cutting it must be commenced within a reasonable time: 89 S.C. 328 ; 90 S.C. 153 ; 98 S.C. 8 ; 102 S.C. 289 ; 108 S.C. 108 . Court has held that 13 and 14 years were unreasonable: 98 S.C. 8 ; 102 S.C. 289 .
Messrs. Kelly Hinds , for respondents, cite: Under deed cutting was to commence within a reasonable time, and what was a reasonable time is to be determined by facts and circumstances of the case: 89 S.C. 328 ; 90 S.C. 153 . Where construction of contract is rendered doubtful by its language, the interpretation placed on it by the parties is usually controlling: 89 S.C. 73 ; 54 S.C. 582 ; 100 S.C. 1 ; 105 S.C. 107 ; 67 S.E. 185 . Where time is essence of contract it may be waived: 9 Cvs. 608; 59 U.S. (L. Ed.) 312; 19 N.W. (Iowa) 312; 32 U.S.
(L. Ed.) 468; 83 S.E. 857. Clark Contracts 676. Waiver: 4 Cyc. 252; 48 So. 213 (Fla.); 49 N.E. 612
(Ind.); 103 N.W. 112 (Iowa); 68 A. 658 (Me.); 75 N.W. 445 (Mich.); 130 S.W. 500 (Mo.); 99 S.W. 55
(Mo.); 92 S.W. 355 (Mo.); 69 P. 938 (Okla.); 148 Fed. 145, 153; 78 C.C.A. 279; 11 Fed. 19, 31; 49 C.C. A. 216; 96 Fed. 34, 54; 83 Fed. 684, 687; 28 C.C.A., 9; 82 Fed. 406, 409; 27 C.C.A. 42; 47 L.R.A. 450; 43 S.C. 57 . Ten years a reasonable time: 89 S.C. 343 ; 90 S.C. 163 . Cutting need not be continuous: 80 S.C. 109 .
Chiee, Gary, Watts.
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Mr. ChiEE Justice Gary.For the reasons therein assigned, the judgment of the Circuit Court is affirmed.
Mr. Justice Watts dissenting.