erroneous denial challenge in Louisiana

102 Louisiana opinions name it 2 courts 1981–2022 3 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Louisiana 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.

Followed or applied (17)

Case	Followed	Cited
State v. Rossgreen la · 1993 · cited in 21 Louisiana opinions naming this issue, 1993–2003 2 sentences 1999To prove reversible error occurred, defendant is required to show only: “(1) the erroneous denial of a challenge for cause; and (2) the use of all his peremptory challenges.” Cross, 658 So.2d at 686 ; Robertson, 630 So.2d 1278, 1281 ; State v. Ross, 623 So.2d 643, 644 (La.1993); State v. Comeaux, 514 So.2d 84, 93 (La.1987). 1999To prove reversible error occurred, defendant is required to show only “(1) the erroneous denial of a challenge for cause; and (2) the use of all his peremptory challenges.” Cross, 658 So.2d at 686 ; Robertson, 630 So.2d at 1281 ; State v. Ross, 623 So.2d 643, 644 (La.1993); State v. Comeaux, 514 So.2d 84, 93 (La.1987).	13	21
State v. Comeauxgreen la · 1987 · cited in 8 Louisiana opinions naming this issue, 1995–2003 2 sentences 1999To prove reversible error occurred, defendant is required to show only: “(1) the erroneous denial of a challenge for cause; and (2) the use of all his peremptory challenges.” Cross, 658 So.2d at 686 ; Robertson, 630 So.2d 1278, 1281 ; State v. Ross, 623 So.2d 643, 644 (La.1993); State v. Comeaux, 514 So.2d 84, 93 (La.1987). 1999To prove reversible error occurred, defendant is required to show only “(1) the erroneous denial of a challenge for cause; and (2) the use of all his peremptory challenges.” Cross, 658 So.2d at 686 ; Robertson, 630 So.2d at 1281 ; State v. Ross, 623 So.2d 643, 644 (La.1993); State v. Comeaux, 514 So.2d 84, 93 (La.1987).	8	8
State v. Juniorsgreen la · 2005 · cited in 4 Louisiana opinions naming this issue, 2006–2019 2 sentences 2019See Juniors , 03-2425 at 8, 915 So.2d at 305 . 2019See Juniors , 03-2425 at 8, 915 So.2d at 305 .	3	4
State v. Turnergreen lactapp · 1997 · cited in 3 Louisiana opinions naming this issue, 2018–2019 2 sentences 2019See State v. Turner , 96-845 (La.App. 3 Cir. 3/5/97) , 692 So.2d 612 , writ denied , 97-2761 (La. 2/20/98), 709 So.2d 773 . 2019See State v. Turner , 96-845 (La.App. 3 Cir. 3/5/97) , 692 So.2d 612 , writ denied , 97-2761 (La. 2/20/98), 709 So.2d 773 .	3	3
State v. Devillegreen la · 1998 · cited in 3 Louisiana opinions naming this issue, 2018–2019 2 sentences 2019See State v. Turner , 96-845 (La.App. 3 Cir. 3/5/97) , 692 So.2d 612 , writ denied , 97-2761 (La. 2/20/98), 709 So.2d 773 . 2019See State v. Turner , 96-845 (La.App. 3 Cir. 3/5/97) , 692 So.2d 612 , writ denied , 97-2761 (La. 2/20/98), 709 So.2d 773 .	3	3
State v. Robertsongreen la · 1994 · cited in 37 Louisiana opinions naming this issue, 1994–2022 2 sentences 2011In order “to prove there has been reversible error warranting reversal of the conviction, defendant need show (1) the erroneous denial of a challenge for cause; and (2) the use of all of his peremptory challenges.” State v. Robertson, 92-2660 (La.1/14/94), 630 So.2d 1278, 1281 . 2010In order “to prove there has been reversible error warranting reversal of the conviction, defendant need show (1) the erroneous denial of a challenge for cause; and (2) the use of all of his peremptory challenges.” Robertson, 630 So.2d at 1281 .	2	37
State v. Bourquegreen la · 1993 · cited in 14 Louisiana opinions naming this issue, 1994–2019 2 sentences 2019Cross , 93-1189 at 6, 658 So.2d at 686 ; Bourque , 622 So.2d at 225 . 2019Cross , 93-1189 at 6, 658 So.2d at 686 ; Bourque , 622 So.2d at 225 .	2	14
State v. Leegreen la · 1990 · cited in 3 Louisiana opinions naming this issue, 1995–2001 2 sentences 2001Robertson , 92-2660, p. 3 (La.1/14/94), 630 So.2d at 1280-1281 , citing State v. Ross, 623 So.2d 643, 644 (La.1993); State v. Bourque, 622 So.2d 198, 225 (La.1993); State v. Lee, 559 So.2d 1310, 1317 (La.1990); State v. Comeaux, 514 So.2d 84, 93 (La. 1987); State v. Brown, 496 So.2d 261, 263-64 (La.1986). 2001The defendant in Baldwin elected to go to trial instead, and he was convicted, sentenced to death, and executed. [29] In Divers, supra, this Court reversed the conviction and sentence based on the erroneous denial of defense challenges for cause, and Divers evidently remains in custody pending retrial of the case. [30] See, e.g., State v. Connolly, 96-1680 (La.7/1/97), 700 So.2d 810 ; State v. Comeaux, 93-2729 (La.7/1/97), 699 So.2d 16 ; State v. Martin, 93-0285 (La.10/17/94), 645 So.2d 190 ; State v. Wille, 595 So.2d 1149 (La.1992); State v. Lee, 559 So.2d 1310 (La.1990); State v. Copeland, 5	2	3
State v. Browngreen la · 1986 · cited in 2 Louisiana opinions naming this issue, 1995–2001 2 sentences 2001Robertson , 92-2660, p. 3 (La.1/14/94), 630 So.2d at 1280-1281 , citing State v. Ross, 623 So.2d 643, 644 (La.1993); State v. Bourque, 622 So.2d 198, 225 (La.1993); State v. Lee, 559 So.2d 1310, 1317 (La.1990); State v. Comeaux, 514 So.2d 84, 93 (La. 1987); State v. Brown, 496 So.2d 261, 263-64 (La.1986). 1995Robertson , 92-2660, p. 3 (La. 1/14/94); 630 So.2d at 1280-1281 , citing State v. Ross, 623 So.2d 643, 644 (La.1993); State v. Bourque, 622 So.2d 198, 225 (La.1993); State v. Lee, 559 So.2d 1310, 1317 (La.1990); State v. Comeaux, 514 So.2d 84, 93 (La.1987); State v. Brown, 496 So.2d 261, 263-264 (La.1986).	2	2
State v. Crossgreen la · 1995 · cited in 24 Louisiana opinions naming this issue, 1996–2020 2 sentences 2012Citing to Cross , 93-1189, p. 6, 658 So.2d at 686 , the Juniors court concluded that to establish "reversible error warranting reversal of a conviction and sentence, defendant need only demonstrate (1) the erroneous denial of a challenge for cause; and (2) the use of all his peremptory challenges.” But see State v. Reeves, 06-2419, p. 86 n. 188 (La.5/5/09), 11 So.3d 1031 , 1086 n. 188, which suggests— apparently erroneously — -that the "overruling” of Cross was "recognized” in Juniors. . 1999To prove reversible error occurred, defendant is required to show only “(1) the erroneous denial of a challenge for cause; and (2) the use of all his peremptory challenges.” Cross, 658 So.2d at 686 ; Robertson, 630 So.2d at 1281 ; State v. Ross, 623 So.2d 643, 644 (La.1993); State v. Comeaux, 514 So.2d 84, 93 (La.1987).	1	24
State v. McIntyregreen la · 1978 · cited in 3 Louisiana opinions naming this issue, 1994–2013 2 sentences 2013Lewis, 2010-1775 at 3, 96 So.3d at 1177 (Bonin, J., dissenting), citing, State v. McIntyre, 365 So.2d 1348, 1351 (La.1978). 1996Ross, 623 So.2d at 644 ; Bourque, 622 So.2d at 225 ; McIntyre, 365 So.2d at 1351 .	1	3
State v. Koongreen la · 1997 · cited in 3 Louisiana opinions naming this issue, 1999–2003 2 sentences 2003R.S. 46:1844(W)(3) which allows the Court to identify by his initials a crime victim, who is a minor. [3] Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 , 86 S.Ct. 1602 , 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966). [4] A transcript of the Defendant's statement is included in the actual record as opposed to being included as an exhibit. [5] Mitchell was referred to both as Tammy Mitchell and Connie Mitchell in the record. [6] The Defendant used his five peremptory challenges on Packer, Gail Bratcher, Deborah Jeffcoat, Linda Kugler, and Claudette LeBlanc. [7] See, State v. Mitchell, 94-2078 (La.5/21/96), 674 So.2d 250, 254 , cert 1999In State v. Cross, 93-1189, pp. 6-7 (La.6/30/95); 658 So.2d 683, 686 , the court held: "To prove there has been reversible error warranting reversal of the conviction and sentence, defendant need only show (1) the erroneous denial of a challenge for cause; and (2) the use of all his peremptory challenges." Accord State v. Koon, 96-1208, p. 17 (La.5/20/97); 704 So.2d 756, 767 , cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 118 S.Ct. 570 , ___ L.Ed.2d ___ (1997).	1	3
State v. Vanderpoolgreen la · 1986 · cited in 3 Louisiana opinions naming this issue, 1993–1999 2 sentences 1999See, State v. Vanderpool, 493 So.2d at 575 . 1993State v. Ross, 623 So.2d 643 (La.1993); State v. Vanderpool, 493 So.2d 574 (La.1986).	1	3
State v. Lewisgreen lactapp · 2012 · cited in 1 Louisiana opinions naming this issue, 2013–2013	1	1
Batson v. Kentuckygreen scotus · 1986 · cited in 1 Louisiana opinions naming this issue, 2012–2012	1	1
State v. Carmouchegreen la · 2003 · cited in 1 Louisiana opinions naming this issue, 2008–2008	1	1
State v. Lindseygreen lactapp · 2005 · cited in 1 Louisiana opinions naming this issue, 2006–2006	1	1

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

Case	Negative	Cited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Louisiana. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (63)

Case	Cited	Years
State v. Jones green la · 2004 2 sentences 2022State v. Jones, 03-3542 (La. 10/19/04), 884 So.2d 582, 588-589 ; State v. Hensley, 04-617 (La. 2005In order to establish that there has been an error warranting reversal, a party must show, "(1) the erroneous denial of a challenge for cause; and (2) the use of all of his peremptory challenges." State v. Jones, 03-3542, p. 10 (La.10/19/04), 884 So.2d 582, 589 , quoting State v. Robertson, 92-2660 (La.1/14/94), 630 So.2d 1278 . *815 As indicated by Dr. Holland in his brief, the Menards still had one remaining peremptory challenge, having exercised only five peremptory challenges.	6	2005–2022
State v. Maxie green la · 1995 2 sentences 1998"To prove there has been reversible error warranting reversal of the conviction and sentence, defendant need only show: (1) the erroneous denial of a challenge for cause; and (2) the use of all of his peremptory challenges." Id. 1996In State v. Maxie, 93-2158 (La. 4/10/95), 653 So.2d 526 , this court reversed the defendant's conviction and sentence based upon an erroneous denial of a challenge for cause.	4	1996–2003
State v. Mitchell green la · 1996 2 sentences 2003R.S. 46:1844(W)(3) which allows the Court to identify by his initials a crime victim, who is a minor. [3] Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 , 86 S.Ct. 1602 , 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966). [4] A transcript of the Defendant's statement is included in the actual record as opposed to being included as an exhibit. [5] Mitchell was referred to both as Tammy Mitchell and Connie Mitchell in the record. [6] The Defendant used his five peremptory challenges on Packer, Gail Bratcher, Deborah Jeffcoat, Linda Kugler, and Claudette LeBlanc. [7] See, State v. Mitchell, 94-2078 (La.5/21/96), 674 So.2d 250, 254 , cert 1997As we stated in State v. Mitchell, in order to prove error warranting reversal of a conviction and sentence, the defendant must show (1) the erroneous denial of a challenge for cause and (2) the use of all peremptory challenges. 94-KA-2078 (La.5/21/96), 674 So.2d 250, 254 , cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 117 S.Ct. 614 , 136 L.Ed.2d 538 (1996) (citing State v. Cross, 93-1189 (La.6/30/95), 658 So.2d 683 ).	4	1996–2003
Click v. Alabama green scotus · 1997 2 sentences 2003R.S. 46:1844(W)(3) which allows the Court to identify by his initials a crime victim, who is a minor. [3] Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 , 86 S.Ct. 1602 , 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966). [4] A transcript of the Defendant's statement is included in the actual record as opposed to being included as an exhibit. [5] Mitchell was referred to both as Tammy Mitchell and Connie Mitchell in the record. [6] The Defendant used his five peremptory challenges on Packer, Gail Bratcher, Deborah Jeffcoat, Linda Kugler, and Claudette LeBlanc. [7] See, State v. Mitchell, 94-2078 (La.5/21/96), 674 So.2d 250, 254 , cert 2003R.S. 46:1844(W)(3) which allows the Court to identify by his initials a crime victim, who is a minor. [3] Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 , 86 S.Ct. 1602 , 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966). [4] A transcript of the Defendant's statement is included in the actual record as opposed to being included as an exhibit. [5] Mitchell was referred to both as Tammy Mitchell and Connie Mitchell in the record. [6] The Defendant used his five peremptory challenges on Packer, Gail Bratcher, Deborah Jeffcoat, Linda Kugler, and Claudette LeBlanc. [7] See, State v. Mitchell, 94-2078 (La.5/21/96), 674 So.2d 250, 254 , cert	3	1999–2003
Reiman v. Wagstaff green scotus · 1996 2 sentences 2003R.S. 46:1844(W)(3) which allows the Court to identify by his initials a crime victim, who is a minor. [3] Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 , 86 S.Ct. 1602 , 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966). [4] A transcript of the Defendant's statement is included in the actual record as opposed to being included as an exhibit. [5] Mitchell was referred to both as Tammy Mitchell and Connie Mitchell in the record. [6] The Defendant used his five peremptory challenges on Packer, Gail Bratcher, Deborah Jeffcoat, Linda Kugler, and Claudette LeBlanc. [7] See, State v. Mitchell, 94-2078 (La.5/21/96), 674 So.2d 250, 254 , cert 1997As we stated in State v. Mitchell, in order to prove error warranting reversal of a conviction and sentence, the defendant must show (1) the erroneous denial of a challenge for cause and (2) the use of all peremptory challenges. 94-KA-2078 (La.5/21/96), 674 So.2d 250, 254 , cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 117 S.Ct. 614 , 136 L.Ed.2d 538 (1996) (citing State v. Cross, 93-1189 (La.6/30/95), 658 So.2d 683 ).	3	1997–2003
Barbee v. Electronic Data Systems Corp. green scotus · 1996 2 sentences 2003R.S. 46:1844(W)(3) which allows the Court to identify by his initials a crime victim, who is a minor. [3] Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 , 86 S.Ct. 1602 , 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966). [4] A transcript of the Defendant's statement is included in the actual record as opposed to being included as an exhibit. [5] Mitchell was referred to both as Tammy Mitchell and Connie Mitchell in the record. [6] The Defendant used his five peremptory challenges on Packer, Gail Bratcher, Deborah Jeffcoat, Linda Kugler, and Claudette LeBlanc. [7] See, State v. Mitchell, 94-2078 (La.5/21/96), 674 So.2d 250, 254 , cert 1997As we stated in State v. Mitchell, in order to prove error warranting reversal of a conviction and sentence, the defendant must show (1) the erroneous denial of a challenge for cause and (2) the use of all peremptory challenges. 94-KA-2078 (La.5/21/96), 674 So.2d 250, 254 , cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 117 S.Ct. 614 , 136 L.Ed.2d 538 (1996) (citing State v. Cross, 93-1189 (La.6/30/95), 658 So.2d 683 ).	3	1997–2003
State v. Connolly green la · 1997 2 sentences 2001The defendant in Baldwin elected to go to trial instead, and he was convicted, sentenced to death, and executed. [29] In Divers, supra, this Court reversed the conviction and sentence based on the erroneous denial of defense challenges for cause, and Divers evidently remains in custody pending retrial of the case. [30] See, e.g., State v. Connolly, 96-1680 (La.7/1/97), 700 So.2d 810 ; State v. Comeaux, 93-2729 (La.7/1/97), 699 So.2d 16 ; State v. Martin, 93-0285 (La.10/17/94), 645 So.2d 190 ; State v. Wille, 595 So.2d 1149 (La.1992); State v. Lee, 559 So.2d 1310 (La.1990); State v. Copeland, 5 1999State v. Connolly, 96-1680 (La.7/1/97), 700 So.2d 810 ; State v. Durham, 94-1036 (La.App. 5 Cir. 4/16/96) , 673 So.2d 1103 .	3	1998–2001
State v. Rhodes green lactapp · 1998 2 sentences 2019App. 4 Cir. 11/18/98), 722 So.2d 1078 , 1079. 2019App. 4 Cir. 11/18/98), 722 So.2d 1078 , 1079.	2	2019–2019
State v. Gant green lactapp · 2006 2 sentences 2010Anderson , 06-2987 at 28, 996 So.2d at 996 ; State v. Gant, 06-232, p. 12 (La.App. 5 Cir. 9/26/06), 942 So.2d 1099, 1113 , writ denied, 06-2529 (La.5/4/07), 956 So.2d 599 . 2009State v. Anderson, 996 So.2d at 996 ; State v. Gant, 06-232 (La.App. 5 Cir. 9/26/06) , 942 So.2d 1099, 1113-1114 , writ denied, 06-2529 (La.5/4/07), 956 So.2d 599 .	2	2009–2010
State v. Gant green la · 2007 2 sentences 2010Anderson , 06-2987 at 28, 996 So.2d at 996 ; State v. Gant, 06-232, p. 12 (La.App. 5 Cir. 9/26/06), 942 So.2d 1099, 1113 , writ denied, 06-2529 (La.5/4/07), 956 So.2d 599 . 2009State v. Anderson, 996 So.2d at 996 ; State v. Gant, 06-232 (La.App. 5 Cir. 9/26/06) , 942 So.2d 1099, 1113-1114 , writ denied, 06-2529 (La.5/4/07), 956 So.2d 599 .	2	2009–2010
State v. Anderson green la · 2008 2 sentences 2010Anderson , 06-2987 at 28, 996 So.2d at 996 ; State v. Gant, 06-232, p. 12 (La.App. 5 Cir. 9/26/06), 942 So.2d 1099, 1113 , writ denied, 06-2529 (La.5/4/07), 956 So.2d 599 . 2009State v. Anderson, 996 So.2d at 996 ; State v. Gant, 06-232 (La.App. 5 Cir. 9/26/06) , 942 So.2d 1099, 1113-1114 , writ denied, 06-2529 (La.5/4/07), 956 So.2d 599 .	2	2009–2010
Dinwiddie v. United States green scotus · 1996 2 sentences 2003R.S. 46:1844(W)(3) which allows the Court to identify by his initials a crime victim, who is a minor. [3] Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 , 86 S.Ct. 1602 , 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966). [4] A transcript of the Defendant's statement is included in the actual record as opposed to being included as an exhibit. [5] Mitchell was referred to both as Tammy Mitchell and Connie Mitchell in the record. [6] The Defendant used his five peremptory challenges on Packer, Gail Bratcher, Deborah Jeffcoat, Linda Kugler, and Claudette LeBlanc. [7] See, State v. Mitchell, 94-2078 (La.5/21/96), 674 So.2d 250, 254 , cert 1999State v. Koon, 96-1208 (La.5/20/97), 704 So.2d 756, 766-67 , cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 118 S.Ct. 570 , ___ L.Ed.2d ___ (1997); State v. Mitchell, 94-2078 (La.5/21/96), 674 So.2d 250, 254 , cert. denied, 519 U.S. 1043 , 117 S.Ct. 614 , 136 L.Ed.2d 538 (1996); State v. Cross, 93-1189 (La.6/30/95), 658 So.2d 683, 686 ; State v. Komurke, 560 So.2d 986, 988 (La.App. 4 Cir. 1990), writ denied, 566 So.2d 982 (La.1990).	2	1999–2003
State v. Hart green la · 1997 2 sentences 2001State v. Hart, 96-0697 (La.03/07/97), 691 So.2d 651 . 2000State v. Hart, 96-0697 (La.3/7/97), 691 So.2d 651 , and cases cited therein.	2	2000–2001
State v. Queen neutral lactapp · 2018 1 sentence 2020App. 3 Cir. 1/4/18), 237 So.3d 547 , writ denied, 18-211 (La. 11/20/18), 257 So.3d 186 . 19-KA-606 17 reversal of the conviction, defendant need only show (1) the erroneous denial of a challenge for cause; and (2) the use of all his peremptory challenges.	1	2020–2020
State v. Matthews neutral la · 2018 2 sentences 2020App. 3 Cir. 1/4/18), 237 So.3d 547 , writ denied, 18-211 (La. 11/20/18), 257 So.3d 186 . 19-KA-606 17 reversal of the conviction, defendant need only show (1) the erroneous denial of a challenge for cause; and (2) the use of all his peremptory challenges. 2020Id. (citing State v. Cross, 93-1189 (La. 6/30/95), 658 So.2d 683, 686 ).	1	2020–2020
State v. Hensley green lactapp · 2005 1 sentence 2015Lindsey , 06-255 at 3, 948 So.2d at 107 ; Hensley , 04-617 at 8, 900 So.2d at 8 .	1	2015–2015
State v. Lindsey green la · 2007 1 sentence 2015Lindsey , 06-255 at 3, 948 So.2d at 107 ; Hensley , 04-617 at 8, 900 So.2d at 8 .	1	2015–2015
State v. White green lactapp · 1991	1	2015–2015
State v. Reeves green la · 2009	1	2012–2012
State v. Campbell green la · 2008	1	2012–2012
State v. Small neutral la · 2004	1	2008–2008
State v. Gipson neutral lactapp · 2003	1	2008–2008
State v. Kang green la · 2003	1	2007–2007
State v. Coates green lactapp · 1995	1	2005–2005
State v. Coates green la · 1996	1	2005–2005
Edwards v. Carlson green scotus · 1997	1	2003–2003
Miranda v. Arizona green scotus · 1966	1	2003–2003
State v. Taylor green la · 2001	1	2003–2003
State v. Brogdon green la · 1984	1	2001–2001
Bonin v. California green scotus · 1989	1	2001–2001
State v. Comeaux green la · 1997	1	2001–2001
State v. Loyd green la · 1986	1	2001–2001
State v. Watson green la · 1984	1	2001–2001
State v. Flowers green la · 1983	1	2001–2001
State v. Willie green la · 1983	1	2001–2001
State v. Eaton green la · 1988	1	2001–2001
State v. Carmouche green la · 1987	1	2001–2001
State v. Williams green la · 1986	1	2001–2001
State v. Moore green la · 1982	1	2001–2001
James Flowers v. Frank Blackburn, Warden, Louisiana State Penitentiary, Angola, Respondent green ca5 · 1986	1	2001–2001

Statutes the citing opinions construe

LA § La. Rev. Stat. § 14:30 (25) LA § La. Rev. Stat. § 14:30.1 (25) LA § La. Rev. Stat. § 15:438 (19) LA § La. Rev. Stat. § 14:10 (14) LA § La. Rev. Stat. § 14:27 (12) LA § La. Rev. Stat. § 14:64 (12) LA § La. Rev. Stat. § 1 (11) LA § La. Rev. Stat. § 14:31 (11) LA § La. Rev. Stat. § 40:967 (11) LA § La. Rev. Stat. § 15:529.1 (10) LA § La. Rev. Stat. § 14:95.1 (9) LA § La. Rev. Stat. § 3 (8)

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.

Where else courts name it

TX 123 (1988–2026) LA 102 (1981–2022) OH 25 (1997–2020) CA 18 (1968–2026) FL 13 (1984–2025) NY 13 (1998–2022) CO 12 (2007–2026) WA 6 (2000–2021) AL 4 (2001–2003) NJ 4 (1979–2021) MT 3 (2002–2026) IN 2 (2002–2013) OR 2 (2024–2024) OK 2 (2018–2018) KS 2 (2014–2018)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check