21 Tennessee opinions name it 3 courts 1941–2025 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 |
|---|---|---|
Bratton v. Stategreen2 sentences2001Bratton v. State, 477 S.W.2d 754, 756 (Tenn. Crim. 2000Bratton v. State, 477 S.W.2d 754, 756 (Tenn. Crim. | 3 | 5 |
Taylor v. Stategreen2 sentences1981Taylor v. State, 180 Tenn. 62 , 171 S.W.2d 403, 404 (1943). 1981Taylor v. State, 180 Tenn. 62 , 171 S.W.2d 403, 404 (1943). | 1 | 6 |
Long v. Stategreen2 sentences2000Such findings of a trial judge in an oral hearing, who sees and hears the witnesses testify, and hears and considers conflicting testimony, will be given the weight of a jury verdict.” Long v. State, 510 S.W.2d 83, 86 (Tenn. Crim. 1979Long v. State, Tenn.Cr.App., 510 S.W.2d 83, 86 . | 1 | 2 |
Carrie Sama v. Edward Hannigangreen1 sentence2025See Sama v. Hannigan, 669 F.3d 585, 590 (5th Cir. 2012) (“District courts are not required to hold an oral hearing on a summary judgment motion.”); Smith v. School Bd. of Orange Cnty., 487 F.3d 1361, 1367 (11th Cir. 2007) (“It is well settled in this circuit that [Federal Rule of Civil Procedure] 56(c) does not require an oral hearing.” (quoting Milburn v. United States, 734 F.2d 762, 765 (11th Cir. 1984))). | 1 | 1 |
George v. Smith v. School Board of Orange Countygreen1 sentence2025See Sama v. Hannigan, 669 F.3d 585, 590 (5th Cir. 2012) (“District courts are not required to hold an oral hearing on a summary judgment motion.”); Smith v. School Bd. of Orange Cnty., 487 F.3d 1361, 1367 (11th Cir. 2007) (“It is well settled in this circuit that [Federal Rule of Civil Procedure] 56(c) does not require an oral hearing.” (quoting Milburn v. United States, 734 F.2d 762, 765 (11th Cir. 1984))). | 1 | 1 |
William R. Milburn and Richard v. Thompson v. The United States of Americagreen1 sentence2025See Sama v. Hannigan, 669 F.3d 585, 590 (5th Cir. 2012) (“District courts are not required to hold an oral hearing on a summary judgment motion.”); Smith v. School Bd. of Orange Cnty., 487 F.3d 1361, 1367 (11th Cir. 2007) (“It is well settled in this circuit that [Federal Rule of Civil Procedure] 56(c) does not require an oral hearing.” (quoting Milburn v. United States, 734 F.2d 762, 765 (11th Cir. 1984))). | 1 | 1 |
Lee Medical, Inc. v. Paula Beechergreen1 sentence2025On the one hand, Tennessee’s 2 An abuse of discretion occurs when a trial court “‘causes an injustice to the party challenging the decision by (1) applying an incorrect legal standard, (2) reaching an illogical or unreasonable decision, or (3) basing its decision on a clearly erroneous assessment of the evidence.’” State v. Reynolds, 635 S.W.3d 893 , 921 (Tenn. 2021) (quoting Lee Med., Inc. v. Beecher, 312 S.W.3d 515, 524 (Tenn. 2010)). 3 Appellants therefore argued that the trial court’s failure to do so was an abuse of discretion. -5- summary judgment procedure has been repeatedly referred t | 1 | 1 |
State v. Chancegreen1 sentence2010Id. at 451 (citing State v. Chance, 778 S.W.2d 457, 461-62 (Tenn. Crim. | 1 | 1 |
Owens v. Stategreen1 sentence2000App. 1974) (citations omitted); see Owens v. State, 13 S.W.3d 742, 755 (Tenn. Crim. | 1 | 1 |
Taylor v. Stategreen1 sentence2000See Taylor, 369 S.W.2d at 388 ; State v McKheen, No. 03C01-9706-CR-00209, 1998 WL 40229 , at*7 (Tenn. Crim. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Tennessee. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Atlas Powder Company v. Leister
neutral
2 sentences1975Taylor v. State, 180 Tenn. 62 , 171 S.W.2d 403 ; Atlas Powder Company v. Leister, 197 Tenn. 491 , 274 S.W.2d 364 ; Bratton v. State, supra. This record fully sustains the trial judge’s finding that the defendant knowingly and voluntarily consented to the search of his apartment. 1975Taylor v. State, 180 Tenn. 62 , 171 S.W.2d 403 ; Atlas Powder Company v. Leister, 197 Tenn. 491 , 274 S.W.2d 364 ; Bratton v. State, supra. This record fully sustains the trial judge’s finding that the defendant knowingly and voluntarily consented to the search of his apartment. | 5 | 1971–1975 |
Maples v. State
green
1 sentence2018Id. | 1 | 2018–2018 |
State v. Forbes
green
1 sentence2010Id. at 451 (citing State v. Chance, 778 S.W.2d 457, 461-62 (Tenn. Crim. | 1 | 2010–2010 |
Miller v. State
green
1 sentence1975Miller v. State (Tenn.Cr.App.), 508 S.W.2d 804 ; Bratton v. State (Tenn.Cr.App.), 477 S.W.2d 754 . | 1 | 1975–1975 |
Polk County v. State Board of Equalization
green
1 sentence1974Reliance is placed upon Polk County v. State Board of Equalization, 484 S.W.2d 49 (Tenn.App.1972). | 1 | 1974–1974 |
Munson v. State
neutral
1 sentence1956Then came Munson v. State, 141 Tenn. 522, 523 , 213 S.W. 916 , wherein this Court declined to reverse for the giving of an oral instruction because such failure affirmatively appeared to be harmless in that there was an agreement in the case “that the conviction was warranted by the facts ’ ’. | 1 | 1956–1956 |
Thomas v. State
green
1 sentence1943Thomas v. State, 109 Tenn., 684 , 75 S. W., 1025 ; Leonard v. State, 155 Tenn., 325 , 292 S. W., 849 . | 1 | 1943–1943 |
Leonard v. State
green
2 sentences1943Thomas v. State, 109 Tenn., 684 , 75 S. W., 1025 ; Leonard v. State, 155 Tenn., 325 , 292 S. W., 849 . 1943Thomas v. State, 109 Tenn., 684 , 75 S. W., 1025 ; Leonard v. State, 155 Tenn., 325 , 292 S. W., 849 . | 1 | 1943–1943 |
Choate v. Sewell
neutral
1 sentence1941Choate v. Sewell, 142 Tenn., 487 , 221 S. W., 190 ; Trice v. McGill, 158 Tenn., 394 , 13 S. W. (2d), 49 ; Boshears v. Foster, 154 Tenn., 494 , 290 S. W., 387 ; Broch v. Broch, supra. Chapter 106, Acts of 1935 (Michie’s 1936 Code, section 10564) added another form of chancery by providing the chancellor might order an oral hearing when in his judgment justice and expedition justified such order. | 1 | 1941–1941 |
Trice v. McGill
green
2 sentences1941Choate v. Sewell, 142 Tenn., 487 , 221 S. W., 190 ; Trice v. McGill, 158 Tenn., 394 , 13 S. W. (2d), 49 ; Boshears v. Foster, 154 Tenn., 494 , 290 S. W., 387 ; Broch v. Broch, supra. Chapter 106, Acts of 1935 (Michie’s 1936 Code, section 10564) added another form of chancery by providing the chancellor might order an oral hearing when in his judgment justice and expedition justified such order. 1941Choate v. Sewell, 142 Tenn., 487 , 221 S. W., 190 ; Trice v. McGill, 158 Tenn., 394 , 13 S. W. (2d), 49 ; Boshears v. Foster, 154 Tenn., 494 , 290 S. W., 387 ; Broch v. Broch, supra. Chapter 106, Acts of 1935 (Michie’s 1936 Code, section 10564) added another form of chancery by providing the chancellor might order an oral hearing when in his judgment justice and expedition justified such order. | 1 | 1941–1941 |
Pearson v. Mut. L. Ins. Co. of N.Y.
neutral
2 sentences1941Pearson v. Mutual Life Insurance Co. of New York, 17 Tenn. App., 503 , 68 S. W. (2d), 963 , was heard on oral evidence by the chancellor, the jury being waived, but there was no written agreement for an oral hearing under Chapter 119, Acts 1917. 1941Pearson v. Mutual Life Insurance Co. of New York, 17 Tenn. App., 503 , 68 S. W. (2d), 963 , was heard on oral evidence by the chancellor, the jury being waived, but there was no written agreement for an oral hearing under Chapter 119, Acts 1917. | 1 | 1941–1941 |
Boshears v. Foster
neutral
2 sentences1941Choate v. Sewell, 142 Tenn., 487 , 221 S. W., 190 ; Trice v. McGill, 158 Tenn., 394 , 13 S. W. (2d), 49 ; Boshears v. Foster, 154 Tenn., 494 , 290 S. W., 387 ; Broch v. Broch, supra. Chapter 106, Acts of 1935 (Michie’s 1936 Code, section 10564) added another form of chancery by providing the chancellor might order an oral hearing when in his judgment justice and expedition justified such order. 1941Choate v. Sewell, 142 Tenn., 487 , 221 S. W., 190 ; Trice v. McGill, 158 Tenn., 394 , 13 S. W. (2d), 49 ; Boshears v. Foster, 154 Tenn., 494 , 290 S. W., 387 ; Broch v. Broch, supra. Chapter 106, Acts of 1935 (Michie’s 1936 Code, section 10564) added another form of chancery by providing the chancellor might order an oral hearing when in his judgment justice and expedition justified such order. | 1 | 1941–1941 |
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.