history rule in Montana

10 Montana opinions name it 1 courts 1916–2025 3 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Montana 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 (3)

Case	Followed	Cited
Chevron Oil Co. v. Husonred scotus · 1971 · cited in 4 Montana opinions naming this issue, 2004–2008 2 sentences 2008Second, it has been stressed that‘we must... weigh the merits and demerits in each case by looking to the prior history of the rule in question, its purpose and effect, and whether retrospective operation will further or retard its operation.’ Finally, we have weighed the inequity imposed by retroactive application, for ‘where a decision of this Court could produce substantial inequitable results if applied retroactively, there is ample basis in our cases for avoiding the injustice or hardship by a holding of nonretroactivity.’ Dempsey , ¶ 21 (quoting Chevron Oil, 404 U.S. at 106-07 , 92 S. Ct 2008Second, it has been stressed that‘we must... weigh the merits and demerits in each case by looking to the prior history of the rule in question, its purpose and effect, and whether retrospective operation will further or retard its operation.’ Finally, we have weighed the inequity imposed by retroactive application, for ‘where a decision of this Court could produce substantial inequitable results if applied retroactively, there is ample basis in our cases for avoiding the injustice or hardship by a holding of nonretroactivity.’ Dempsey , ¶ 21 (quoting Chevron Oil, 404 U.S. at 106-07 , 92 S. Ct	2	4
United States v. Bajakajiangreen scotus · 1998 · cited in 2 Montana opinions naming this issue, 2025–2025 2 sentences 2025In determining the standard for excessiveness of a fine, the Court first looked to the Magna Carta, English Bill of Rights, dictionaries from the founding era, and the history of the clause, concluding, “None of these sources suggests how disproportional to the gravity of an offense a fine must be in order to be deemed constitutionally excessive.” Bajakajian, 524 U.S. at 336 , 118 S. Ct. at 2037 . 2025In determining the standard for excessiveness of a fine, the Court first looked to the Magna Carta, English Bill of Rights, dictionaries from the founding era, and the history of the clause, concluding, “None of these sources suggests how disproportional to the gravity of an offense a fine must be in order to be deemed constitutionally excessive.” Bajakajian, 524 U.S. at 336 , 118 S. Ct. at 2037 .	2	2
Giles v. Californiagreen scotus · 2008 · cited in 1 Montana opinions naming this issue, 2023–2023 2 sentences 2023Discussing the history of the exception back to 1666, Giles explained that forfeiture by wrongdoing “permitted the introduction of statements of a witness who was ‘detained’ or ‘kept away’ by the ‘means or procurement’ of the defendant.” Giles, 554 U.S. at 359 , 128 S. Ct. at 2683 (citation omitted). ¶36 Giles considered “whether a defendant forfeits his Sixth Amendment right to confront a witness against him when a judge determines that a wrongful act by the defendant made the witness unavailable to testify at trial.” Giles, 554 U.S. at 355 , 128 S. Ct. at 2681 . 2023Discussing the history of the exception back to 1666, Giles explained that forfeiture by wrongdoing “permitted the introduction of statements of a witness who was ‘detained’ or ‘kept away’ by the ‘means or procurement’ of the defendant.” Giles, 554 U.S. at 359 , 128 S. Ct. at 2683 (citation omitted). ¶36 Giles considered “whether a defendant forfeits his Sixth Amendment right to confront a witness against him when a judge determines that a wrongful act by the defendant made the witness unavailable to testify at trial.” Giles, 554 U.S. at 355 , 128 S. Ct. at 2681 .	1	1

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

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

Also cited on this issue (10)

Case	Cited	Years
Breen v. Peck green nj · 1958 2 sentences 1980The case of Breen v. Peck (1958), 28 N.J. 351 , 146 A.2d 665 , contains a history of the rule. 1980The case of Breen v. Peck (1958), 28 N.J. 351 , 146 A.2d 665 , contains a history of the rule.	1	1980–1980
State v. Lawson neutral mont · 1912 2 sentences 1926The statute has been considered by this court in State v. Ritz, 65 Mont. 180 , 211 Pac. 298 ; State v. Bolton, 65 Mont. 74 , 212 Pac. 504 ; State v. Slothower, 56 Mont. 230 , 182 Pac. 270 ; State v. Larson, 44 Mont. 488 , 120 Pac. 808 ; State v. Stevenson, 26 Mont. 332 , 67 Pac. 1001 ; State v. Calder, 23 Mont. 504 , 59 Pac. 903 ; State v. Geddes, 22 Mont. 68 , 55 92 Pac. 919; and frota these decisions the following general rules are deducible: (a) The corroborating evidence may be supplied by the defendant or his witnesses. (b) It need not be direct evidence — it may be circumstantial. (e) I 1926The statute has been considered by this court in State v. Ritz, 65 Mont. 180 , 211 Pac. 298 ; State v. Bolton, 65 Mont. 74 , 212 Pac. 504 ; State v. Slothower, 56 Mont. 230 , 182 Pac. 270 ; State v. Larson, 44 Mont. 488 , 120 Pac. 808 ; State v. Stevenson, 26 Mont. 332 , 67 Pac. 1001 ; State v. Calder, 23 Mont. 504 , 59 Pac. 903 ; State v. Geddes, 22 Mont. 68 , 55 92 Pac. 919; and frota these decisions the following general rules are deducible: (a) The corroborating evidence may be supplied by the defendant or his witnesses. (b) It need not be direct evidence — it may be circumstantial. (e) I	1	1926–1926
State v. Slothower neutral mont · 1919 2 sentences 1926The statute has been considered by this court in State v. Ritz, 65 Mont. 180 , 211 Pac. 298 ; State v. Bolton, 65 Mont. 74 , 212 Pac. 504 ; State v. Slothower, 56 Mont. 230 , 182 Pac. 270 ; State v. Larson, 44 Mont. 488 , 120 Pac. 808 ; State v. Stevenson, 26 Mont. 332 , 67 Pac. 1001 ; State v. Calder, 23 Mont. 504 , 59 Pac. 903 ; State v. Geddes, 22 Mont. 68 , 55 92 Pac. 919; and frota these decisions the following general rules are deducible: (a) The corroborating evidence may be supplied by the defendant or his witnesses. (b) It need not be direct evidence — it may be circumstantial. (e) I 1926The statute has been considered by this court in State v. Ritz, 65 Mont. 180 , 211 Pac. 298 ; State v. Bolton, 65 Mont. 74 , 212 Pac. 504 ; State v. Slothower, 56 Mont. 230 , 182 Pac. 270 ; State v. Larson, 44 Mont. 488 , 120 Pac. 808 ; State v. Stevenson, 26 Mont. 332 , 67 Pac. 1001 ; State v. Calder, 23 Mont. 504 , 59 Pac. 903 ; State v. Geddes, 22 Mont. 68 , 55 92 Pac. 919; and frota these decisions the following general rules are deducible: (a) The corroborating evidence may be supplied by the defendant or his witnesses. (b) It need not be direct evidence — it may be circumstantial. (e) I	1	1926–1926
State v. Bolton green mont · 1922 2 sentences 1926The statute has been considered by this court in State v. Ritz, 65 Mont. 180 , 211 Pac. 298 ; State v. Bolton, 65 Mont. 74 , 212 Pac. 504 ; State v. Slothower, 56 Mont. 230 , 182 Pac. 270 ; State v. Larson, 44 Mont. 488 , 120 Pac. 808 ; State v. Stevenson, 26 Mont. 332 , 67 Pac. 1001 ; State v. Calder, 23 Mont. 504 , 59 Pac. 903 ; State v. Geddes, 22 Mont. 68 , 55 92 Pac. 919; and frota these decisions the following general rules are deducible: (a) The corroborating evidence may be supplied by the defendant or his witnesses. (b) It need not be direct evidence — it may be circumstantial. (e) I 1926The statute has been considered by this court in State v. Ritz, 65 Mont. 180 , 211 Pac. 298 ; State v. Bolton, 65 Mont. 74 , 212 Pac. 504 ; State v. Slothower, 56 Mont. 230 , 182 Pac. 270 ; State v. Larson, 44 Mont. 488 , 120 Pac. 808 ; State v. Stevenson, 26 Mont. 332 , 67 Pac. 1001 ; State v. Calder, 23 Mont. 504 , 59 Pac. 903 ; State v. Geddes, 22 Mont. 68 , 55 92 Pac. 919; and frota these decisions the following general rules are deducible: (a) The corroborating evidence may be supplied by the defendant or his witnesses. (b) It need not be direct evidence — it may be circumstantial. (e) I	1	1926–1926
State v. Ritz green mont · 1922 2 sentences 1926The statute has been considered by this court in State v. Ritz, 65 Mont. 180 , 211 Pac. 298 ; State v. Bolton, 65 Mont. 74 , 212 Pac. 504 ; State v. Slothower, 56 Mont. 230 , 182 Pac. 270 ; State v. Larson, 44 Mont. 488 , 120 Pac. 808 ; State v. Stevenson, 26 Mont. 332 , 67 Pac. 1001 ; State v. Calder, 23 Mont. 504 , 59 Pac. 903 ; State v. Geddes, 22 Mont. 68 , 55 92 Pac. 919; and frota these decisions the following general rules are deducible: (a) The corroborating evidence may be supplied by the defendant or his witnesses. (b) It need not be direct evidence — it may be circumstantial. (e) I 1926The statute has been considered by this court in State v. Ritz, 65 Mont. 180 , 211 Pac. 298 ; State v. Bolton, 65 Mont. 74 , 212 Pac. 504 ; State v. Slothower, 56 Mont. 230 , 182 Pac. 270 ; State v. Larson, 44 Mont. 488 , 120 Pac. 808 ; State v. Stevenson, 26 Mont. 332 , 67 Pac. 1001 ; State v. Calder, 23 Mont. 504 , 59 Pac. 903 ; State v. Geddes, 22 Mont. 68 , 55 92 Pac. 919; and frota these decisions the following general rules are deducible: (a) The corroborating evidence may be supplied by the defendant or his witnesses. (b) It need not be direct evidence — it may be circumstantial. (e) I	1	1926–1926
Great American Indemnity Co. v. Government of the Capital green prsupreme · 1942 1 sentence 1926The statute has been considered by this court in State v. Ritz, 65 Mont. 180 , 211 Pac. 298 ; State v. Bolton, 65 Mont. 74 , 212 Pac. 504 ; State v. Slothower, 56 Mont. 230 , 182 Pac. 270 ; State v. Larson, 44 Mont. 488 , 120 Pac. 808 ; State v. Stevenson, 26 Mont. 332 , 67 Pac. 1001 ; State v. Calder, 23 Mont. 504 , 59 Pac. 903 ; State v. Geddes, 22 Mont. 68 , 55 *92 Pac. 919; and frota these decisions the following general rules are deducible: (a) The corroborating evidence may be supplied by the defendant or his witnesses. (b) It need not be direct evidence — it may be circumstantial. (e) I	1	1926–1926
State v. Stevenson neutral mont · 1902 2 sentences 1926The statute has been considered by this court in State v. Ritz, 65 Mont. 180 , 211 Pac. 298 ; State v. Bolton, 65 Mont. 74 , 212 Pac. 504 ; State v. Slothower, 56 Mont. 230 , 182 Pac. 270 ; State v. Larson, 44 Mont. 488 , 120 Pac. 808 ; State v. Stevenson, 26 Mont. 332 , 67 Pac. 1001 ; State v. Calder, 23 Mont. 504 , 59 Pac. 903 ; State v. Geddes, 22 Mont. 68 , 55 92 Pac. 919; and frota these decisions the following general rules are deducible: (a) The corroborating evidence may be supplied by the defendant or his witnesses. (b) It need not be direct evidence — it may be circumstantial. (e) I 1926The statute has been considered by this court in State v. Ritz, 65 Mont. 180 , 211 Pac. 298 ; State v. Bolton, 65 Mont. 74 , 212 Pac. 504 ; State v. Slothower, 56 Mont. 230 , 182 Pac. 270 ; State v. Larson, 44 Mont. 488 , 120 Pac. 808 ; State v. Stevenson, 26 Mont. 332 , 67 Pac. 1001 ; State v. Calder, 23 Mont. 504 , 59 Pac. 903 ; State v. Geddes, 22 Mont. 68 , 55 92 Pac. 919; and frota these decisions the following general rules are deducible: (a) The corroborating evidence may be supplied by the defendant or his witnesses. (b) It need not be direct evidence — it may be circumstantial. (e) I	1	1926–1926
State v. Calder green mont · 1900 1 sentence 1926The statute has been considered by this court in State v. Ritz, 65 Mont. 180 , 211 Pac. 298 ; State v. Bolton, 65 Mont. 74 , 212 Pac. 504 ; State v. Slothower, 56 Mont. 230 , 182 Pac. 270 ; State v. Larson, 44 Mont. 488 , 120 Pac. 808 ; State v. Stevenson, 26 Mont. 332 , 67 Pac. 1001 ; State v. Calder, 23 Mont. 504 , 59 Pac. 903 ; State v. Geddes, 22 Mont. 68 , 55 *92 Pac. 919; and frota these decisions the following general rules are deducible: (a) The corroborating evidence may be supplied by the defendant or his witnesses. (b) It need not be direct evidence — it may be circumstantial. (e) I	1	1926–1926
State v. Geddes green mont · 1899 1 sentence 1926The statute has been considered by this court in State v. Ritz, 65 Mont. 180 , 211 Pac. 298 ; State v. Bolton, 65 Mont. 74 , 212 Pac. 504 ; State v. Slothower, 56 Mont. 230 , 182 Pac. 270 ; State v. Larson, 44 Mont. 488 , 120 Pac. 808 ; State v. Stevenson, 26 Mont. 332 , 67 Pac. 1001 ; State v. Calder, 23 Mont. 504 , 59 Pac. 903 ; State v. Geddes, 22 Mont. 68 , 55 *92 Pac. 919; and frota these decisions the following general rules are deducible: (a) The corroborating evidence may be supplied by the defendant or his witnesses. (b) It need not be direct evidence — it may be circumstantial. (e) I	1	1926–1926
Jenkins v. Carroll green mont · 1910 2 sentences 1916The history of her claim and the controversy over it will be found recited at length in Jenkins v. Carroll, 42 Mont. 302 , 112 Pac. 1064 , and need not be repeated. 1916The history of her claim and the controversy over it will be found recited at length in Jenkins v. Carroll, 42 Mont. 302 , 112 Pac. 1064 , and need not be repeated.	1	1916–1916

Where else courts name it

PA 74 (1863–2024) CA 57 (1880–2026) TX 50 (1878–2023) NM 42 (1970–2025) WA 41 (1906–2025) NJ 40 (1925–2023) LA 40 (1934–2025) MD 39 (1966–2023) IL 34 (1924–2022) FL 30 (1959–2023) NY 29 (1892–2008) GA 28 (1900–2025) TN 26 (1940–2022) OR 25 (1954–2025) MO 23 (1888–2018) MI 23 (1944–2024) AL 19 (1935–2024) OH 17 (1913–2023) IA 15 (1885–2021) SD 15 (1974–2025) CO 14 (1946–2025) UT 14 (1949–2021) VA 13 (1954–2025) MN 13 (1969–2006) ND 13 (1916–2005) WI 13 (1926–2023) CT 12 (1968–2016) WY 12 (1975–2015) AZ 12 (1960–2014) KY 12 (1922–2018) MT 10 (1916–2025) IN 9 (1958–2020) DC 9 (1946–2007) ID 9 (1951–2022) NC 9 (1973–2000) KS 9 (1905–2013) AR 8 (1979–2003) MS 8 (1968–2008) WV 7 (1936–2018) OK 7 (1979–2024) MA 7 (1903–2003) RI 6 (1969–2020) AK 6 (1977–2025) VT 6 (1976–2017) SC 5 (1938–1990) HI 5 (1980–2022) DE 5 (1992–2018) NV 4 (1970–2013) NE 4 (1897–2019) NH 4 (1932–2003) PR 2 (1926–1929)

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