Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
10 Tennessee opinions name it 3 courts 1952–2022 2 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 |
|---|---|---|
Davidson v. Lindseygreen2 sentences2022So it is said that he must be satisfied, as well as the jury; that it is his duty to weigh the evidence; and, if he is dissatisfied with the verdict of the jury, he should set it aside.” Davidson, 104 S.W.3d at 488 (quoting Smithwick, 79 S.W. at 804). 2008In 2003, our Supreme Court, in Davidson v. Lindsey, 104 S.W.3d 483, 488 (Tenn. 2003), “reaffirmed” the thirteenth juror standard “that had been the law in Tennessee -4- [for] almost 100 years[,]”5 Blackburn, 2008 WL 2278497 , at *6-7, and examined the rule’s rationale: The reasons given for the rule are, in substance, that the circuit judge hears the testimony, just as the jury does, sees the witnesses, and observes their demeanor upon the witness stand; that, by his training and experience in the weighing of testimony, and the application of legal rules thereto, he is especially qualified for | 1 | 3 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Tennessee. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Cumberland Telephone & Telegraph Co. v. Smithwick
green
2 sentences2002However, interestingly enough, the term “thirteenth juror” seems to have been first verbalized by the Supreme Court in the 1904 case of Cumberland Telephone & Telegraph Co. v. Smithwick, 112 Tenn. 463 , 79 S.W. 803 (1904): The reasons given for the rule are, in substance, that the circuit judge hears the testimony, just as the jury does, sees the witnesses, and observes their demeanor upon the witness stand; that, by his training and experience in the weighing of testimony, and the application of legal rules thereto, he is especially qualified for the correction of any errors into which the ju 1952Sound reasons for the foregoing rule are stated in Telephone & Telegraph Co. v. Smithwick, supra [ 112 Tenn. 463 , 79 S. W. 804 ], as follows: “The reasons given for the rule are, in substance, that the circuit judge hears the testimony, just as the jury does, sees the witnesses, and observes their demeanor upon the witness stand; that, by his training and experience in the weighing of testimony, and the application of legal rules thereto, he is especially qualified for the correction of any errors into which the jury by inexperience may have fallen, whereby they have failed, in their verdict, | 3 | 1952–2002 |
Witter v. Nesbit
green
1 sentence2021This role is referred to as the “thirteenth juror.”14 Id. (citing Holden v. Rannick, 682 S.W.2d 903 , 904–05 14 The Tennessee Supreme Court has reaffirmed the “well-established” duty of a trial judge to act as “thirteenth juror”: The reasons given for the rule are, in substance, that the circuit judge hears the testimony, just as the jury does, sees the witnesses, and observes their demeanor upon the witness stand; that, by his training and experience in the weighing of testimony, and the application of legal rules thereto, he is especially qualified for the correction of any errors into which | 1 | 2021–2021 |
Holden v. Rannick
green
1 sentence2021This role is referred to as the “thirteenth juror.”14 Id. (citing Holden v. Rannick, 682 S.W.2d 903 , 904–05 14 The Tennessee Supreme Court has reaffirmed the “well-established” duty of a trial judge to act as “thirteenth juror”: The reasons given for the rule are, in substance, that the circuit judge hears the testimony, just as the jury does, sees the witnesses, and observes their demeanor upon the witness stand; that, by his training and experience in the weighing of testimony, and the application of legal rules thereto, he is especially qualified for the correction of any errors into which | 1 | 2021–2021 |
Hawkins v. Reynolds
green
2 sentences1991Hawkins v. Reynolds, 62 Tenn.App. 686 , 467 S.W.2d 791 (1971), and authorities cited therein. 1991Hawkins v. Reynolds, 62 Tenn.App. 686 , 467 S.W.2d 791 (1971), and authorities cited therein. | 1 | 1991–1991 |
State v. Hamilton
green
2 sentences1988State v. Kinner, 701 S.W.2d 224 (Tenn.Crim.App.1985); State v. Hamilton, supra. The reasons given by defense counsel were insufficient to afford the defendant relief from the waiver. 1988App. 1985); State v. Hamilton, supra. The reasons given by defense counsel were insufficient to afford the defendant relief from the waiver. | 1 | 1988–1988 |
State v. Kinner
green
1 sentence1988State v. Kinner, 701 S.W.2d 224 (Tenn.Crim.App.1985); State v. Hamilton, supra. The reasons given by defense counsel were insufficient to afford the defendant relief from the waiver. | 1 | 1988–1988 |
McAndrews v. Hamilton County
neutral
2 sentences1967The reasons given for the immunity of the counties may be found in a number of cases, such as Vance v. Shelby County, 152 Tenn. 141 , 273 S.W. 557 , wherein the case of McAndrews v. Hamilton County, 105 Tenn. 399 , 58 S.W. 483 , is cited and a number of reasons are quoted from it of why the county should not be liable, and it is on some of these reasons that the Metropolitan Government here relies, that is, that there are no funds set up out of which such actions as here brought might be paid. 1967The reasons given for the immunity of the counties may be found in a number of cases, such as Vance v. Shelby County, 152 Tenn. 141 , 273 S.W. 557 , wherein the case of McAndrews v. Hamilton County, 105 Tenn. 399 , 58 S.W. 483 , is cited and a number of reasons are quoted from it of why the county should not be liable, and it is on some of these reasons that the Metropolitan Government here relies, that is, that there are no funds set up out of which such actions as here brought might be paid. | 1 | 1967–1967 |
Vance v. Shelby County
neutral
2 sentences1967The reasons given for the immunity of the counties may be found in a number of cases, such as Vance v. Shelby County, 152 Tenn. 141 , 273 S.W. 557 , wherein the case of McAndrews v. Hamilton County, 105 Tenn. 399 , 58 S.W. 483 , is cited and a number of reasons are quoted from it of why the county should not be liable, and it is on some of these reasons that the Metropolitan Government here relies, that is, that there are no funds set up out of which such actions as here brought might be paid. 1967The reasons given for the immunity of the counties may be found in a number of cases, such as Vance v. Shelby County, 152 Tenn. 141 , 273 S.W. 557 , wherein the case of McAndrews v. Hamilton County, 105 Tenn. 399 , 58 S.W. 483 , is cited and a number of reasons are quoted from it of why the county should not be liable, and it is on some of these reasons that the Metropolitan Government here relies, that is, that there are no funds set up out of which such actions as here brought might be paid. | 1 | 1967–1967 |
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.