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 Oklahoma opinions name it 2 courts 1913–1977 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Oklahoma 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 |
|---|---|---|
| No positive-treatment citations attached to this issue in Oklahoma. | ||
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Oklahoma. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Big Jack Mining Co. v. Parkinson
green
2 sentences1935In the case of Big Jack Mining Co. v. Parkinson, 41 Okla. 125 , 137 P. 678 , this court said: “Whether, in a given case, there should be a reversal for error in giving an instruction depends quite as much upon the evidence before the jury to which the instruction might be applied as upon the abstract accuracy of the language of the instruction, and so, if it is apparent that the language of the instruction, though inaccurate, yet, when applied to the evidence before the jury, it could not have misled the jury to believe their duty was different from what it actually was, the inaccuracy can aff 1935In the case of Big Jack Mining Co. v. Parkinson, 41 Okla. 125 , 137 P. 678 , this court said: “Whether, in a given case, there should be a reversal for error in giving an instruction depends quite as much upon the evidence before the jury to which the instruction might be applied as upon the abstract accuracy of the language of the instruction, and so, if it is apparent that the language of the instruction, though inaccurate, yet, when applied to the evidence before the jury, it could not have misled the jury to believe their duty was different from what it actually was, the inaccuracy can aff | 2 | 1915–1935 |
Tidmore v. State
neutral
1 sentence1977As stated in Tidmore v. State, Okl.Cr., 341 P.2d 618 , where counsel for an accused sits by and offers no objection to the instruction given by the trial court and offers no suggested instruction or instructions covering the matter complained of on appeal, before a reversal is required the error in the instruction, if any, must be of a fundamental nature. | 1 | 1977–1977 |
Barnsdall Nat. Bank v. Dykes
neutral
2 sentences1935In the case of Big Jack Mining Co. v. Parkinson, 41 Okla. 125 , 137 P. 678 , this court said: “Whether, in a given case, there should be a reversal for error in giving an instruction depends quite as much upon the evidence before the jury to which the instruction might be applied as upon the abstract accuracy of the language of the instruction, and so, if it is apparent that the language of the instruction, though inaccurate, yet, when applied to the evidence before the jury, it could not have misled the jury to believe their duty was different from what it actually was, the inaccuracy can aff 1935In the case of Big Jack Mining Co. v. Parkinson, 41 Okla. 125 , 137 P. 678 , this court said: “Whether, in a given case, there should be a reversal for error in giving an instruction depends quite as much upon the evidence before the jury to which the instruction might be applied as upon the abstract accuracy of the language of the instruction, and so, if it is apparent that the language of the instruction, though inaccurate, yet, when applied to the evidence before the jury, it could not have misled the jury to believe their duty was different from what it actually was, the inaccuracy can aff | 1 | 1935–1935 |
Cushing Refining & Gasoline Co. v. Deshan
green
2 sentences1935In the case of Big Jack Mining Co. v. Parkinson, 41 Okla. 125 , 137 P. 678 , this court said: “Whether, in a given case, there should be a reversal for error in giving an instruction depends quite as much upon the evidence before the jury to which the instruction might be applied as upon the abstract accuracy of the language of the instruction, and so, if it is apparent that the language of the instruction, though inaccurate, yet, when applied to the evidence before the jury, it could not have misled the jury to believe their duty was different from what it actually was, the inaccuracy can aff 1935In the case of Big Jack Mining Co. v. Parkinson, 41 Okla. 125 , 137 P. 678 , this court said: “Whether, in a given case, there should be a reversal for error in giving an instruction depends quite as much upon the evidence before the jury to which the instruction might be applied as upon the abstract accuracy of the language of the instruction, and so, if it is apparent that the language of the instruction, though inaccurate, yet, when applied to the evidence before the jury, it could not have misled the jury to believe their duty was different from what it actually was, the inaccuracy can aff | 1 | 1935–1935 |
Teague v. Adams
neutral
2 sentences1928This reads as follows: “Whether, in a given case, there should be a reversal for error in giving an instruction depends quite as much upon the evidence before the jury to which the instruction might be applied as upon the abstract accuracy of the language of the instruction, and so, if it is apparent that the language of the instruction, though inaccurate, yet, when applied to the evidence before the jury, it could not have misled the jury to believe their duty was different from what it actually was, the inaccuracy can afford no reason for reversal.” See, also, Teague v. Adams, 52 Okla. 107 , 1928This reads as follows: “Whether, in a given case, there should be a reversal for error in giving an instruction depends quite as much upon the evidence before the jury to which the instruction might be applied as upon the abstract accuracy of the language of the instruction, and so, if it is apparent that the language of the instruction, though inaccurate, yet, when applied to the evidence before the jury, it could not have misled the jury to believe their duty was different from what it actually was, the inaccuracy can afford no reason for reversal.” See, also, Teague v. Adams, 52 Okla. 107 , | 1 | 1928–1928 |
Carver Chiropractic College v. Armstrong
neutral
2 sentences1928This reads as follows: “Whether, in a given case, there should be a reversal for error in giving an instruction depends quite as much upon the evidence before the jury to which the instruction might be applied as upon the abstract accuracy of the language of the instruction, and so, if it is apparent that the language of the instruction, though inaccurate, yet, when applied to the evidence before the jury, it could not have misled the jury to believe their duty was different from what it actually was, the inaccuracy can afford no reason for reversal.” See, also, Teague v. Adams, 52 Okla. 107 , 1928This reads as follows: “Whether, in a given case, there should be a reversal for error in giving an instruction depends quite as much upon the evidence before the jury to which the instruction might be applied as upon the abstract accuracy of the language of the instruction, and so, if it is apparent that the language of the instruction, though inaccurate, yet, when applied to the evidence before the jury, it could not have misled the jury to believe their duty was different from what it actually was, the inaccuracy can afford no reason for reversal.” See, also, Teague v. Adams, 52 Okla. 107 , | 1 | 1928–1928 |
Bressler v. People
neutral
1 sentence1913Mr. Justice Schofield, in the case of Bressler v. People, 117 Ill. 422 , 8 N. E. 62 , quoted with approval by the Supreme Court of Oklahoma Territory in Hodge v. Territory, 12 Okla. 115 , 69 Pac. 1077, 1079 , said: “It has often been said by this court — -and its correctness is obvious although it might never have been said — that whether, in a given case, there should be a reversal for error in giving an instruction depends quite as much upon the evidence before, the jury to which the instruction might be applied as upon the abstract accuracy of the language of the instruction, and so, if it | 1 | 1913–1913 |
Hodge v. Territory of Oklahoma
neutral
1 sentence1913Mr. Justice Schofield, in the case of Bressler v. People, 117 Ill. 422 , 8 N. E. 62 , quoted with approval by the Supreme Court of Oklahoma Territory in Hodge v. Territory, 12 Okla. 115 , 69 Pac. 1077, 1079 , said: “It has often been said by this court — -and its correctness is obvious although it might never have been said — that whether, in a given case, there should be a reversal for error in giving an instruction depends quite as much upon the evidence before, the jury to which the instruction might be applied as upon the abstract accuracy of the language of the instruction, and so, if it | 1 | 1913–1913 |
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.