10 Virginia opinions name it 2 courts 2019–2025 9 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Virginia 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 |
|---|---|---|
Forest Lakes Cmty. Ass'n, Inc. v. United Land Corp. of Am.green2 sentences2025Father argues that the trial court did not properly weigh the factors in Code § 20-124.3 that decide the “best interests of the children,” but fails to “‘lay his finger’ on the alleged misjudgment of the court below.” Embrey v. Commonwealth, No. 0778-16-3, slip op. at 2, 2017 Va. App. LEXIS 89 , at *3 (Mar. 28, 2017) (quoting Forest Lakes Cmty. Ass’n v. United Land Corp. of Am., 293 Va. 113, 122 (2017)).3 “A properly aimed assignment of error must ‘point out’ the targeted error and not simply take ‘a shot into the flock’ of issues that cluster around the 3 Embrey is properly cited as informati 2024“In this way, ‘[a] properly aimed assignment of error must “point out” the targeted error and not simply take “a shot into the flock” of issues that cluster around the litigation.’” Stoltz v. Commonwealth, 297 Va. 529 , 534 (2019) (alteration in original) (quoting Forest Lakes Cmty Ass’n v. United Land Corp. of Am., 293 Va. 113, 122 (2017)). | 6 | 8 |
Plant Lipford, Inc. v. E. W. Gates & Son Co.green2 sentences2024Gates & Son Co., 141 Va. 325, 332 (1925)). 2022Gates & Son Co., 141 Va. 325, 332 (1925))). | 3 | 3 |
Yeatts v. Murraygreen2 sentences2024See Moison v. Commonwealth, 302 Va. 417 , 420 (2023) (order) (“[T]he purpose of assignments of error is to point out the errors with reasonable certainty . . . and to limit discussion to these points.” (quoting Yeatts v. Murray, 249 Va. 285, 290 (1995))); id. (noting that the language of an assignment of error “cabins the error that [appellate courts] can consider”); Forest Lakes Cmty. Ass’n, Inc. v. United Land Corp. of America, 293 Va. 113, 123 (2017) (“A properly aimed assignment of error must ‘point out’ the targeted error and not simply take ‘a shot 3 Jury Instruction No. 12 provided that 2024See Moison v. Commonwealth, 302 Va. 417 , 420 (2023) (order) (“[T]he purpose of assignments of error is to point out the errors with reasonable certainty . . . and to limit discussion to these points.” (quoting Yeatts v. Murray, 249 Va. 285, 290 (1995))); id. (noting that the language of an assignment of error “cabins the error that [appellate courts] can consider”); Forest Lakes Cmty. Ass’n, Inc. v. United Land Corp. of America, 293 Va. 113, 123 (2017) (“A properly aimed assignment of error must ‘point out’ the targeted error and not simply take ‘a shot 3 Jury Instruction No. 12 provided that | 1 | 1 |
Buchanan v. Buchanangreen1 sentence2022Thus, this Court “will not search the record for errors in order to interpret the appellant’s contention and correct deficiencies in a brief.” Yap v. Commonwealth, 49 Va. App. 622, 629 (2007) (quoting Buchanan v. Buchanan, 14 Va. App. 53, 56 (1992)). | 1 | 1 |
First National Bank v. William R. Trigg Co.green1 sentence2022Trigg Co., 106 Va. 327, 341 (1907)). “[A] general assignment of error . . . without pointing out the specific errors complained of, does not amount to any assignment of error at all.” Id. at 580; see also Forest Lakes Cmty. Ass’n, Inc. v. United Land Corp. of Am., 293 Va. 113, 123 (2017) (“A properly aimed assignment of error must ‘point out’ the targeted error and not simply take ‘a shot into the flock’ of issues that cluster around the litigation.” (quoting Plant Lipford, Inc. v. E.W. | 1 | 1 |
Yap v. Commonwealthgreen1 sentence2022Thus, this Court “will not search the record for errors in order to interpret the appellant’s contention and correct deficiencies in a brief.” Yap v. Commonwealth, 49 Va. App. 622, 629 (2007) (quoting Buchanan v. Buchanan, 14 Va. App. 53, 56 (1992)). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Virginia. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
United States v. Salerno
green
1 sentence2019To mount a successful facial challenge, “the challenger must establish that no set of circumstances exists under which the [statute in question] would be valid,” as opposed to an as- applied challenge, in which the challenger alleges “that the [statute in question] is unconstitutional because of the way it was applied to the particular facts of [his] case.” United States v. Salerno, 481 U.S. 739 , 745 & n.3 (1987). | 1 | 2019–2019 |
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.