Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
5 Kentucky opinions name it 1 courts 2010–2016 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Kentucky 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 |
|---|---|---|
Wright v. Carrollgreen2 sentences2016Thus, while Dendrite and Cahill remain the "law of the case," this Court recognizes that the doctrine is "prudential in nature and serves to direct a court's decision, not limit its power." Wright v. Carroll, 452 S.W.3d 127, 130 (Ky. 2014). 2016Thus, while Dendrite and Cahill remain the "law of the case," this Court recognizes that the doctrine is "prudential in nature and serves to direct a court's decision, not limit its power." Wright v. Carroll, 452 S.W.3d 127, 130 (Ky. 2014). | 2 | 2 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Kentucky. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
United States v. Olano
green
2 sentences2010The Cotton Court applied the four-step test adopted in United States v. Olano, 507 U.S. 725 , 113 S.Ct. 1770 , 123 L.Ed.2d 508 (1999) which requires (1) error (2) that is plain and that (3) affects substantial rights. 2010The Cotton Court applied the four-step test adopted in United States v. Olano, 507 U.S. 725 , 113 S.Ct. 1770 , 123 L.Ed.2d 508 (1999) which requires (1) error (2) that is plain and that (3) affects substantial rights. | 3 | 2010–2010 |
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.