19 Tennessee opinions name it 2 courts 1969–2024 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 |
|---|---|---|
Blankenship v. Blankenshipgreen2 sentences2008This Court has held that, in order to be adverse, possession “must be of such a character as to leave no doubt of claim of ownership by adverse possession and to give notice to the public of the possession and the claim.” Blankenship v. Blankenship, 658 S.W.2d 125, 127 (Tenn.Ct.App.1983). 2003This Court has held that, in order to be adverse, possession “must be of such a character as to leave no doubt of claim of ownership by adverse possession and to give notice to the public of the possession and the claim.” Blankenship v. Blankenship, 658 S.W.2d 125, 127 (Tenn. Ct. App.1983). | 4 | 6 |
Cooke v. Smithgreen2 sentences2024The acts relied on for a claim of adversity “must be of such a character as to leave no doubt of the claim of ownership by adverse possession and to give notice to the public of the possession and the claim.” Cooke v. Smith, 721 S.W.2d 251, 254 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1986). 2012Cooke v. Smith, 721 S.W.2d 251, 254 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1985). | 3 | 3 |
McBee v. Stategreen2 sentences2010McBee v. State, 655 S.W.2d 191, 195 (Tenn. Crim. 1997McBee v. State, 655 S.W.2d 191, 195 (Tenn.Crim.App. 1988). | 2 | 2 |
Bynum v. Hollowellgreen2 sentences2008We have also held that the party claiming ownership by adverse possession “must sustain the proposition that the possession was in fact adverse to the true owner.” Bynum v. Hollowell, 656 S.W.2d 400, 403 (Tenn.Ct.App.1983). 2003We have also held that the party claiming ownership by adverse possession “must sustain the proposition that the possession was in fact adverse to the true owner.” Bynum v. Hollowell, 656 S.W.2d 400, 403 (Tenn. Ct. App.1983). | 2 | 2 |
Pullen v. Hopkinsgreen2 sentences1986Pullen v. Hopkins, Clark & Co., 69 Tenn. 741, 747 (1878). 1983Pullen v. Hopkins, Clark & Co., 69 Tenn. 741, 747 (1878). | 2 | 2 |
Cumulus Broadcasting, Inc. v. Shimgreen1 sentence2024Cf. Cumulus Broad., 226 S.W.3d at 376-77 (explaining that color of title is not required). | 1 | 1 |
Rashe Moore v. State of Tennesseegreen1 sentence2018As outlined above, trial counsel “did not want [the petitioner] anywhere near that gun.” Trial counsel’s testimony makes clear that he weighed the evidence produced at trial against his “all or nothing” approach to the case and determined it best not to request the possession instruction so as to avoid “admitting that [the petitioner] might have had that gun in his hand.” Our Supreme Court has stated, “[f]ailing to request lesser-included offense instructions will not constitute deficient performance, however, if the decision was a matter of strategy.” Moore v. State, 485 S.W.3d 411, 419 (Tenn | 1 | 1 |
Rosenberg v. United Statesgreen1 sentence2013See e.g., Rosenberg v. United States, 360 U.S. 367, 371 (1959) (holding that the trial court’s error in withholding a document to which the defense was entitled pursuant to the Jencks rule was harmless because the information contained in the withheld document was already in defense counsel’s possession). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Hayesgreen1 sentence2013“This Court will uphold a trial court’s findings of fact in a suppression hearing unless the evidence preponderates otherwise.” State v. Hayes, 188 S.W.3d 505, 510 (Tenn. 2006) (citing State v. Odom, 928 S.W.2d 18, 23 (Tenn. 1996)). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Odomgreen1 sentence2013“This Court will uphold a trial court’s findings of fact in a suppression hearing unless the evidence preponderates otherwise.” State v. Hayes, 188 S.W.3d 505, 510 (Tenn. 2006) (citing State v. Odom, 928 S.W.2d 18, 23 (Tenn. 1996)). | 1 | 1 |
Banks v. Stategreen1 sentence1999Banks v. State, 556 S.W.2d 88, 90 (Tenn.Crim.App.1977). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Tennessee. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Strickland v. Washington
green
1 sentence2018Strickland, 466 U.S. at 687 . | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Goad v. State
green
1 sentence2018As outlined above, trial counsel “did not want [the petitioner] anywhere near that gun.” Trial counsel’s testimony makes clear that he weighed the evidence produced at trial against his “all or nothing” approach to the case and determined it best not to request the possession instruction so as to avoid “admitting that [the petitioner] might have had that gun in his hand.” Our Supreme Court has stated, “[f]ailing to request lesser-included offense instructions will not constitute deficient performance, however, if the decision was a matter of strategy.” Moore v. State, 485 S.W.3d 411, 419 (Tenn | 1 | 2018–2018 |
State v. Smith
green
1 sentence1998The record is inadequate to support a finding that the defendant suffers from deficits in his adaptive behavior.” Sm ith, 893 S.W.2d at 918 . 18 The records from the Department of Correction in the possession of defense counsel transcribed an evaluation of the appellant when he was s eventeen years old finding: “We be lieve subjec t to have be low avera ge intelligenc e. Progn osis for p rison and civil adjustm ent guar ded.” 19 The S tate conc edes th at defen se cou nsel was ineffective for failing to pre sent ad equate proof at the hearing held to determine whether, as a matter of law, the | 1 | 1998–1998 |
Allen v. Farnsworth
neutral
1 sentence1969Allen v. Farnsworth, 13 Tenn. 189 (1833). | 1 | 1969–1969 |
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.