10 Mississippi opinions name it 2 courts 1999–2018 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Mississippi 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 |
|---|---|---|
Van Meter v. Alfordgreen2 sentences2013Even where a party has moved to dismiss, the plain language of the rule requires a notice from the clerk of the deficiency and a fourteen day opportunity to cure the deficiency.” Van Meter v. Alford, 774 So.2d 430, 432 (¶ 4) (Miss. 2000). ¶ 17. 2012“Even where a party has moved to dismiss, the plain language of the rule requires a notice from the clerk of the deficiency and a fourteen day opportunity to cure the deficiency.” Id. | 2 | 4 |
Poole Ex Rel. Poole v. Avaragreen2 sentences2009Gone are the days when this Court found Rule 702 satisfied when an expert was qualified to testify with an opinion grounded in “something more than unsupported speculation of subjective belief that is grounded in methods and procedures of science,” Poole v. Avara, 908 So.2d 716, 723 (Miss.2005), and this Court seems increasingly disinterested in the plain language of the rule itself, which clearly notes that expert witnesses may be qualified not only by virtue of experience, but also by knowledge, skill, training, or education. 2009Gone are the days when this Court found Rule 702 satisfied when an expert was qualified to testify with an opinion grounded in "something more than unsupported speculation of subjective belief that is grounded in methods and procedures of science," Poole v. Avara, 908 So.2d 716, 723 (Miss.2005), and this Court seems increasingly disinterested in the plain language of the rule itself, which clearly notes that expert witnesses may be qualified not only by virtue of experience, but also by knowledge, skill, training, or education. | 2 | 2 |
Michelle La Nette Nunley v. City of Los Angelesgreen2 sentences2009See Nunley v. City of Los Angeles, 52 F.3d 792, 798 (9th Cir.1995). ¶ 9. 2009See Nunley v. City of Los Angeles, 52 F.3d 792, 798 (9th Cir.1995). ¶ 9. | 1 | 1 |
Simmons v. Bank of Mississippigreen1 sentence2002Dist., 738 So.2d 212, 215 (¶ 8) (Miss.1999) (citing Simmons v. Bank of Mississippi, 593 So.2d 40, 42-43 (Miss.1992)). | 1 | 1 |
Warwick v. Gautier Utility Dist.green1 sentence2002Dist., 738 So.2d 212, 215 (¶ 8) (Miss.1999) (citing Simmons v. Bank of Mississippi, 593 So.2d 40, 42-43 (Miss.1992)). | 1 | 1 |
United States v. David Mathis, United States of America v. Samuel Mooregreen1 sentence1999In United States v. Mathis, 550 F.2d 180, 182 (4th Cir.1976), a witness had plead guilty and the defense sought to use his prior testimony from his guilty plea hearing to impeach his testimony at the trial of the defendant. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Mississippi. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Sanders v. State
green
1 sentence2013So mandates the plain language of the rule and — unless we overturn it — our opinion in Sanders v. State, 9 So.3d 1132 (Miss.2009). | 1 | 2013–2013 |
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.