9 Kansas opinions name it 2 courts 1984–2022 1 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Kansas 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 |
|---|---|---|
Arizona v. Gantgreen2 sentences2016See Gant, 556 U.S. at 341-44 (finding that the area within which the arrestee might gain possession of a weapon or destructible evidence defines the boundaries of the exception); United States v. Robinson, 414 U.S. 218, 251 , 94 S. Ct. 467 , 38 L. 2016See Gant, 556 U.S. at 341-44 (finding that the area within which the arrestee might gain possession of a weapon or destructible evidence defines the boundaries of the exception); United States v. Robinson, 414 U.S. 218, 251 , 94 S. Ct. 467 , 38 L. | 2 | 6 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Kansas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
United States v. Robinson
green
2 sentences2016See Gant, 556 U.S. at 341-44 (finding that the area within which the arrestee might gain possession of a weapon or destructible evidence defines the boundaries of the exception); United States v. Robinson, 414 U.S. 218, 251 , 94 S. Ct. 467 , 38 L. 2016See Gant, 556 U.S. at 341-44 (finding that the area within which the arrestee might gain possession of a weapon or destructible evidence defines the boundaries of the exception); United States v. Robinson, 414 U.S. 218, 251 , 94 S. Ct. 467 , 38 L. | 2 | 2016–2016 |
In re Estate of Lentz
green
1 sentence2022Cf. In re Estate of Lentz, 312 Kan. 490 , 506, 476 P.3d 1151 (2020) (Luckert, C.J., concurring) ("The concept that a court consider jurisdiction as an antecedent to a merits determination has a practical impact in a system driven by stare decisis principles because even dicta or obiter dictum 'should not be lightly disregarded' by lower courts."). | 1 | 2022–2022 |
People v. Mitchell
red
1 sentence1997In People v. Mitchell, 39 N.Y.2d 173 , the New York Court of Appeals provided a three-prong test for analyzing the applicability of the emergency doctrine exception. | 1 | 1997–1997 |
City of Manhattan v. Kent
green
2 sentences1984Additionally, we have long recognized a trial court has broad discretion in determining what evidence will be allowed in an eminent domain proceeding: “ ‘It has been said that a condemnation trial is a sober inquiry into values, designed to strike a just balance between the economic interests of the public and those of the landowner, and that the trial of such a proceeding is essentially an informational .inquisition in which the boundaries of the inquiry must be liberally intrusted to the sound discretion of the trial judge.’ ’’ City of Manhattan v. Kent, 228 Kan. 513, 519-20 , 618 P.2d 1180 1984Additionally, we have long recognized a trial court has broad discretion in determining what evidence will be allowed in an eminent domain proceeding: “ ‘It has been said that a condemnation trial is a sober inquiry into values, designed to strike a just balance between the economic interests of the public and those of the landowner, and that the trial of such a proceeding is essentially an informational .inquisition in which the boundaries of the inquiry must be liberally intrusted to the sound discretion of the trial judge.’ ’’ City of Manhattan v. Kent, 228 Kan. 513, 519-20 , 618 P.2d 1180 | 1 | 1984–1984 |
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.