5 Kansas opinions name it 1 courts 1911–2006 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Kansas courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
State v. Kesselringgreen1 sentence2006See Kesselring, 279 Kan. at 692 . 2. | 1 | 1 |
United States v. Singletongreen1 sentence2004Moreover, the defendant makes no claim on appeal that Agent Cordts’ questioning was coercive, and a procedural violation of Miranda is only presumptively coercive rather than actually coercive.' See Dang, 267 Kan. at 206 (quoting U.S. v. Singleton, 922 F. Supp. 1522, 1530-31 [D. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Kansas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Dang
neutral
1 sentence2004Moreover, the defendant makes no claim on appeal that Agent Cordts’ questioning was coercive, and a procedural violation of Miranda is only presumptively coercive rather than actually coercive.' See Dang, 267 Kan. at 206 (quoting U.S. v. Singleton, 922 F. Supp. 1522, 1530-31 [D. | 1 | 2004–2004 |
Idaho v. Wright
green
1 sentence1998In Idaho v. Wright, hearsay statements made by a 3-year-old child declarant to an examining pediatrician were admitted at trial under the State’s “residual hearsay exception.” 497 U.S. at 811 . | 1 | 1998–1998 |
Vilm v. Hudson
green
2 sentences1968(Vilm v. Hudson, 167 Kan. 372, 375 , 205 P. 2d 1021 ; In re Estate of Johnson, 180 Kan. 740 , 308 P. 2d 100 ; Green v. Bluff Creek Oil Company, 287 F. 2d 66 .) *606 The defendant makes no claim the concerned transaction constituted a gift, or, as indicated, that the plaintiff’s claim for relief was prematurely brought. 1968(Vilm v. Hudson, 167 Kan. 372, 375 , 205 P. 2d 1021 ; In re Estate of Johnson, 180 Kan. 740 , 308 P. 2d 100 ; Green v. Bluff Creek Oil Company, 287 F. 2d 66 .) *606 The defendant makes no claim the concerned transaction constituted a gift, or, as indicated, that the plaintiff’s claim for relief was prematurely brought. | 1 | 1968–1968 |
Harold J. Green v. Bluff Creek Oil Company
green
1 sentence1968(Vilm v. Hudson, 167 Kan. 372, 375 , 205 P. 2d 1021 ; In re Estate of Johnson, 180 Kan. 740 , 308 P. 2d 100 ; Green v. Bluff Creek Oil Company, 287 F. 2d 66 .) *606 The defendant makes no claim the concerned transaction constituted a gift, or, as indicated, that the plaintiff’s claim for relief was prematurely brought. | 1 | 1968–1968 |
Estate of Johnson v. Bassler
green
2 sentences1968(Vilm v. Hudson, 167 Kan. 372, 375 , 205 P. 2d 1021 ; In re Estate of Johnson, 180 Kan. 740 , 308 P. 2d 100 ; Green v. Bluff Creek Oil Company, 287 F. 2d 66 .) *606 The defendant makes no claim the concerned transaction constituted a gift, or, as indicated, that the plaintiff’s claim for relief was prematurely brought. 1968(Vilm v. Hudson, 167 Kan. 372, 375 , 205 P. 2d 1021 ; In re Estate of Johnson, 180 Kan. 740 , 308 P. 2d 100 ; Green v. Bluff Creek Oil Company, 287 F. 2d 66 .) *606 The defendant makes no claim the concerned transaction constituted a gift, or, as indicated, that the plaintiff’s claim for relief was prematurely brought. | 1 | 1968–1968 |
Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co. v. Conlon
neutral
2 sentences1911Having in his abstract made the statement that there was no proof of such payment, he relies upon rule 10a of this court as construed in Railway Co. v. Conlon, 77 Kan. 324 , 94 Pac. 148 , and, since the plaintiffs (ap-pellees) have failed to meet the challenge by counter abstract or otherwise setting forth such evidence, he insists that the j udgment must be reversed. 1911Having in his abstract made the statement that there was no proof of such payment, he relies upon rule 10a of this court as construed in Railway Co. v. Conlon, 77 Kan. 324 , 94 Pac. 148 , and, since the plaintiffs (ap-pellees) have failed to meet the challenge by counter abstract or otherwise setting forth such evidence, he insists that the j udgment must be reversed. | 1 | 1911–1911 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.