5 Virginia opinions name it 1 courts 1872–1918 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Virginia 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 Virginia. | ||
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Virginia. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Jones v. Tatum
green
2 sentences1872Jones v. Tatum, 19 Gratt. 720 . 1872Jones v. Tatum, 19 Gratt. 720 . | 3 | 1872–1872 |
Crislip v. Cain
green
2 sentences1872Crislip v. Cain. 19 W. 1872Crislip v. Cain. 19 W. | 3 | 1872–1872 |
Gritts v. Fisher
green
2 sentences1918Mr. Justice Van Devanter, in Gritts v. Fisher, 224 U. S. 640 , 32 Sup. Ct. 580, 56 L. 1918Mr. Justice Van Devanter, in Gritts v. Fisher, 224 U. S. 640 , 32 Sup. Ct. 580, 56 L. | 1 | 1918–1918 |
Norfolk & Atlantic Terminal Co. v. Morris' Administratrix
green
2 sentences1910In Norfolk, &c., Co. v. Morris, 101 Va. 422 , 44 S. E. 719 ,, this court held that “The order in which evidence is introduced is a matter largely in the discretion of the trial court, for which, this court will not reverse a judgment, save in very exceptional' cases.” Besides, the failure of the defendants to avail themselves of the leave of the court to offer the letter at a later stage of the proceedings was a waiver of the first exception. 1910In Norfolk, &c., Co. v. Morris, 101 Va. 422 , 44 S. E. 719 ,, this court held that “The order in which evidence is introduced is a matter largely in the discretion of the trial court, for which, this court will not reverse a judgment, save in very exceptional' cases.” Besides, the failure of the defendants to avail themselves of the leave of the court to offer the letter at a later stage of the proceedings was a waiver of the first exception. | 1 | 1910–1910 |
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.