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 3 courts 1925–2022 1 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 |
|---|---|---|
Douglas Lauren Marsh v. Larry F. Taylor, Wardengreen1 sentence2016Atkinson v. Bob Guzik, U.S. Parole Comm’n, No. 95-5261, 1995 WL 499502, at *2 (6th Cir. Aug. 21, 1995) (“A mere clerical error or misuse of semantics in a Commission document does not preclude the Commission’s proper application of its regulations and the applicable statutes.” (citing Marsh v. Taylor, 925 F.2d 1131, 1133 (9th Cir. 1991) (per curiam))); Squire v. Fulwood, 75 F. Supp. 3d 548, 550 (D.D.C. 2014) (“[A] typographical error in the document memorializing the jurisdiction of conviction does not change that fact.”); Darrell Joseph Jackson, Jr., v. U.S. Parole Comm’n, No. 13- 4 The July | 1 | 1 |
Squire v. Fulwoodgreen1 sentence2016Atkinson v. Bob Guzik, U.S. Parole Comm’n, No. 95-5261, 1995 WL 499502, at *2 (6th Cir. Aug. 21, 1995) (“A mere clerical error or misuse of semantics in a Commission document does not preclude the Commission’s proper application of its regulations and the applicable statutes.” (citing Marsh v. Taylor, 925 F.2d 1131, 1133 (9th Cir. 1991) (per curiam))); Squire v. Fulwood, 75 F. Supp. 3d 548, 550 (D.D.C. 2014) (“[A] typographical error in the document memorializing the jurisdiction of conviction does not change that fact.”); Darrell Joseph Jackson, Jr., v. U.S. Parole Comm’n, No. 13- 4 The July | 1 | 1 |
Claude H. Atkinson v. Bob Guzik United States Parole Commissiongreen1 sentence2016Atkinson v. Bob Guzik, U.S. Parole Comm’n, No. 95-5261, 1995 WL 499502, at *2 (6th Cir. Aug. 21, 1995) (“A mere clerical error or misuse of semantics in a Commission document does not preclude the Commission’s proper application of its regulations and the applicable statutes.” (citing Marsh v. Taylor, 925 F.2d 1131, 1133 (9th Cir. 1991) (per curiam))); Squire v. Fulwood, 75 F. Supp. 3d 548, 550 (D.D.C. 2014) (“[A] typographical error in the document memorializing the jurisdiction of conviction does not change that fact.”); Darrell Joseph Jackson, Jr., v. U.S. Parole Comm’n, No. 13- 4 The July | 1 | 1 |
Coleman v. Morgangreen1 sentence2010This Court has previously held that an illegal sentence may serve as a basis for habeas relief only if the illegality of the sentence is “egregious to the point of voidness.” Coleman v. Morgan, 159 S.W.3d 887, 890 (Tenn. Crim. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Stephensongreen1 sentence2003See, e.g., State v. Stephenson, 752 S.W.2d 80, 81 (Tenn.1988) (finding that notice filed the day trial began was not ineffective because the defendant failed to show prejudice or request a continuance); State v. Debro, 787 S.W.2d 932, 933-34 (Tenn.Crim.App.1989) (finding that the notice was not ineffective despite a technical error therein because the defect was a mere clerical error of which the defendant had knowledge). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Debrogreen1 sentence2003See, e.g., State v. Stephenson, 752 S.W.2d 80, 81 (Tenn.1988) (finding that notice filed the day trial began was not ineffective because the defendant failed to show prejudice or request a continuance); State v. Debro, 787 S.W.2d 932, 933-34 (Tenn.Crim.App.1989) (finding that the notice was not ineffective despite a technical error therein because the defect was a mere clerical error of which the defendant had knowledge). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Tennessee. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Jennifer Parks v. Rebecca A. Walker, M.D.
green
1 sentence2022The defendants cited Parks v. Walker, 585 S.W.3d 895 , 897-99 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2018), in which this Court concluded that authorizations sent to each defendant authorizing it “to release, use or disclose” the plaintiff’s health records to the other providers were “not sufficient to enable defendants to obtain plaintiff’s medical records.” The defendants also pointed out that Plaintiff had not pled “extraordinary cause” in response to their motions to dismiss, but in the event that Plaintiff raised the argument, they suggested that an envelope stuffing error was a mere clerical error that would n | 1 | 2022–2022 |
Sheafer v. Mitchell
green
1 sentence1925Sheafer v. Mitchell, 109 Tenn., 181 . *519 The incongruity of dates in the second deed might render it defective, although the date, 1864, might be a mere clerical error. | 1 | 1925–1925 |
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.