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 Mississippi opinions name it 1 courts 1992–2007 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Mississippi 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 |
|---|---|---|
Smith by and Through Young v. Estate of Kinggreen2 sentences1997See, e.g., Smith v. King, 501 So.2d 1120, 1122-23 (Miss. 1987) (holding that proof that an administratrix committed fraud upon the court when she knew of an illegitimate child of the decedent but failed to inform the chancery court of the child's existence would serve to toll the time bar of § 91-1-15(3)(c), where petition for heirship was otherwise untimely filed); see also In the Matter of Flowers, 493 So.2d 950 (Miss. 1986) (remanding for consideration of whether fraud was perpetrated on the court, which would toll the time bar of § 91-1-15(3)(c) of an otherwise untimely claim). ¶ 47. 1996See, e.g., Smith v. King, 501 So.2d 1120, 1122-23 (Miss.1987) (holding that proof that an ad-ministratrix committed fraud upon the court when she knew of an illegitimate child of the decedent but failed to inform the chancery court of the child’s existence would serve to toll the time bar of § 91-l-15(3)(c), where petition for heirship was otherwise untimely filed); see also In the Matter of Flowers, 493 So.2d 950 (Miss.1986) (remanding for consideration of whether fraud was perpetrated on the court, which would toll the time bar of § 91-l-15(3)(c) of an otherwise untimely claim). ¶47. | 3 | 3 |
Matter of Estate of Flowersgreen2 sentences1997See, e.g., Smith v. King, 501 So.2d 1120, 1122-23 (Miss. 1987) (holding that proof that an administratrix committed fraud upon the court when she knew of an illegitimate child of the decedent but failed to inform the chancery court of the child's existence would serve to toll the time bar of § 91-1-15(3)(c), where petition for heirship was otherwise untimely filed); see also In the Matter of Flowers, 493 So.2d 950 (Miss. 1986) (remanding for consideration of whether fraud was perpetrated on the court, which would toll the time bar of § 91-1-15(3)(c) of an otherwise untimely claim). ¶ 47. 1996See, e.g., Smith v. King, 501 So.2d 1120, 1122-23 (Miss.1987) (holding that proof that an ad-ministratrix committed fraud upon the court when she knew of an illegitimate child of the decedent but failed to inform the chancery court of the child’s existence would serve to toll the time bar of § 91-l-15(3)(c), where petition for heirship was otherwise untimely filed); see also In the Matter of Flowers, 493 So.2d 950 (Miss.1986) (remanding for consideration of whether fraud was perpetrated on the court, which would toll the time bar of § 91-l-15(3)(c) of an otherwise untimely claim). ¶47. | 3 | 3 |
Hodges v. Stategreen2 sentences2007The only other case we have found in which an otherwise untimely error was found to be preserved solely through a motion for a new trial was Hodges v. State, 912 So.2d 730, 751 (Miss.2005). 1997The only other case we have found in which an otherwise untimely error was found to be preserved solely through a motion for a new trial was Hodges v. State, 912 So. 2d 730, 751 (Miss. 2005). | 2 | 2 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Mississippi. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Smith v. State
green
2 sentences2007Smith, 797 So.2d at 856 . 1997Smith, 797 So. 2d at 856 . | 2 | 1997–2007 |
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.