How cited: Lebedun v. Day · Go Syfert

Lebedun v. Day (1979)

green · 37 citation events across 10 courts. Showing the 7 strongest citers on record (one row per citing case, strongest signal kept).
Treatment trajectory · 1980 → 2026 · click a year to view the case as of then
198020032026
Cited (see also) · 4th Cir. · signal: see also
See Matthews v. Commonwealth, 216 Va. 358, 361 , 218 S.E.2d 538, 541 (1975); see also Hailey v. Dorsey, 580 F.2d 112, 116 (4th Cir.1978), cert. denied, 440 U.S. 937 , 99 S.Ct. 1282 , 59 L.Ed.2d 495 (1979).
Cited · 4th Cir. · signal: see
See Hailey v. Dorsey, 580 F.2d 112, 115 (4th Cir. 1978), cert. denied, Cotton v. Dorsey, 440 U.S. 937 , 99 S.Ct. 1282 , 59 L.Ed.2d 495 (1979). 2 .
green Mahoney v. Mahoney (2000)
Cited (see also) · Va. Ct. App. · signal: see also · 2 citations in this opinion
Co. v. Hill, 106 Va. 501, 505 , 56 S.E. 278, 280 (1907)); see also Hailey v. Dorsey, 580 F.2d 112, 114 (4th Cir.1978), cert. denied, 440 U.S. 937 , 99 S.Ct. 1282 , 59 L.Ed.2d 495 (1979).
green Mahoney v. Mahoney (2000)
Cited (see also) · Va. Ct. App. · signal: see also
See Code §§ 16.1-106, 16.1-118; see Copperthite Pie Corp. v. Whitehurst, 157 Va. 480, 488 , 162 S.E. 189, 191 (1932); see also Hailey v. Dorsey, 580 F.2d 112, 114 (4th Cir.1978), cert. denied, 440 U.S. 937 , 99 S.Ct. 1282 , 59 L.Ed.2d 495 (1979).
green Nunnery v. Freeman (1996)
Cited · E.D.N.C. · signal: see
See Hailey v. Dorsey, 580 F.2d 112, 115 (4th Cir.1978), cert. denied, [ 440 U.S. 937 , 99 S.Ct. 1282 , 59 L.Ed.2d 495 (1979) ].
green Creasey v. Muncy (1985)
Cited · W.D. Va. · signal: see
See Hailey v. Dorsey, 580 F.2d 112 (4th Cir.1978), cert. denied, 440 U.S. 937 , 99 S.Ct. 1282 , 59 L.Ed.2d 495 (1979); Pigford v. United States, 518 F.2d 831 (4th Cir.1975); Grundler v. North Carolina, 283 F.2d 798 (4th Cir.1960).
green Hennessy v. State (1983)
Cited (see also) · Tex. Crim. App. · signal: see also
Veracity can be established by showing that the informant is “credible” or that the information given is “reliable.” Alternatively stated, “[t]he affidavit must contain the underlying circumstances which lead to the informant’s conclusion of guilt and underlying circumstances which lead affiant to believe that informant was credible and reliable.” Keen v. State, 626 S.W.2d 309, 312 (Tex.Cr.App.1981); see also Etchieson v. State, 574 S.W.2d 753 (Tex.Cr.App.1978), cert. denied…