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 Tennessee opinions name it 2 courts 2001–2025 2 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Tennessee 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. Goodwingreen2 sentences2025That being said, the rule does not specify a particular form that the written waiver must follow, see, e.g., State v. Battles, No. W1998-00558-CCA-R3- CD, 1999 WL 1525475 , at * 8 n. 5 (Tenn. Crim. App. Dec. 30, 1999) (stating that repeated filing of pro se motions “initiated by the defendant” were “sufficient to satisfy the written waiver requirement”), and this court has held that the absence of a written waiver “does not necessarily preclude a constitutionally valid waiver,” State v. Hatch, No. W2000- 01005-CCA-R3-CD, 2001 WL 1268442 , at *6 (Tenn. Crim. App. Oct. 19, 2001) (first citing St 2021That being said, the rule does not specify a particular form that the written waiver must follow, see, e.g., State v. Gregory Scott Battles, No. W1998-00558- CCA-R3-CD, 1999 WL 1525475 , at * 8 n. 5 (Tenn. Crim. App., Jackson, Dec. 30, 1999) (stating that repeated filing of pro se motions “initiated by the defendant” were “sufficient to satisfy the written waiver requirement”), and this court has held that the absence of a written waiver “does not necessarily preclude a constitutionally valid waiver,” State v. Vincent Hatch, No. W2000-01005-CCA-R3-CD, 2001 WL 1268442 , at *6 (Tenn. Crim. App., | 2 | 2 |
State v. Bobogreen1 sentence2014State v. Bobo, 814 S.W.2d 353, 359 (Tenn. 1991). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Tennessee. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Ellis
green
1 sentence2003Id. | 1 | 2003–2003 |
Moore Construction Co. v. Clarksville Department of Electricity
green
1 sentence2001The rule as to waiver of written change order provisions (in the absence of a written waiver provision contemplated by T.C.A. § 47-50-112(c)) the common law remains as asserted in Galbreath and in Moore Constr. v. Clarksville Dept. of Elec., 707 S.W.2d 1 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1985) wherein this Court held: Including a written change order requirement in a construction contract is not uncommon. | 1 | 2001–2001 |
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.