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.
9 Mississippi opinions name it 2 courts 1966–1999 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 |
|---|---|---|
Stonecipher v. Kornhausgreen2 sentences1999The lower court based its opinion on Stonecipher v. Kornhaus, where this Court stated the general rule that "a vendor of real estate is not liable to the purchaser in possession, ... which is caused by a dangerous condition on the premises, whether natural or artificial, which existed when the purchaser took possession." 623 So.2d 955, 962 (Miss. 1993). ¶ 66. 1997The lower court based its opinion on Stonecipher v. Kornhaus, where this Court stated the general rule that "a vendor of real estate is not liable to the purchaser in possession, . . . which is caused by a dangerous condition on the premises, whether natural or artificial, which existed when the purchaser took possession." 623 So.2d 955, 962 (Miss. 1993). ¶66. | 2 | 2 |
Saulsberry v. Saulsberry, Et Ux.green2 sentences1966We pretermit consideration of this interesting question, and base our decision on the absence of fraud or other unconscionable conduct on the part of Mrs. Fletcher and the fact that she was not unjustly enriched, irrespective of whether a constructive trust must arise out of a conveyance. j' In Saulsberry v. Saulsberry, 223 Miss. 684, 690 , 78 So.2d 758, 760 (1955), this Court stated the general rule as to when ■and under what circumstances a constructive trust will arise, using the following language: i A constructive trust is one that arises by operation of law against one who, by fraud, act 1966We pretermit consideration of this interesting question, and base our decision on the absence of fraud or other unconscionable conduct on the part of Mrs. Fletcher and the fact that she was not unjustly enriched, irrespective of whether a constructive trust must arise out of a conveyance. j' In Saulsberry v. Saulsberry, 223 Miss. 684, 690 , 78 So.2d 758, 760 (1955), this Court stated the general rule as to when ■and under what circumstances a constructive trust will arise, using the following language: i A constructive trust is one that arises by operation of law against one who, by fraud, act | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Mississippi. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Floyd v. State
green
2 sentences1999Cummings v. State, 219 So.2d 673 (Miss. 1969); Ladnier v. State, 254 Miss. 469 , 182 So.2d 389 (1966); Brown v. State, 224 Miss. 498 , 80 So.2d 761 (1955); Pegram v. State, 223 Miss. 294 , 78 So.2d 153 (1955); Floyd v. State, 166 Miss. 15 , 148 So. 226 (1933). 1999Cummings v. State, 219 So.2d 673 (Miss. 1969); Ladnier v. State, 254 Miss. 469 , 182 So.2d 389 (1966); Brown v. State, 224 Miss. 498 , 80 So.2d 761 (1955); Pegram v. State, 223 Miss. 294 , 78 So.2d 153 (1955); Floyd v. State, 166 Miss. 15 , 148 So. 226 (1933). | 2 | 1979–1999 |
Pegram v. State
green
2 sentences1999Cummings v. State, 219 So.2d 673 (Miss. 1969); Ladnier v. State, 254 Miss. 469 , 182 So.2d 389 (1966); Brown v. State, 224 Miss. 498 , 80 So.2d 761 (1955); Pegram v. State, 223 Miss. 294 , 78 So.2d 153 (1955); Floyd v. State, 166 Miss. 15 , 148 So. 226 (1933). 1999Cummings v. State, 219 So.2d 673 (Miss. 1969); Ladnier v. State, 254 Miss. 469 , 182 So.2d 389 (1966); Brown v. State, 224 Miss. 498 , 80 So.2d 761 (1955); Pegram v. State, 223 Miss. 294 , 78 So.2d 153 (1955); Floyd v. State, 166 Miss. 15 , 148 So. 226 (1933). | 2 | 1979–1999 |
Cummings v. State
green
2 sentences1999Cummings v. State, 219 So.2d 673 (Miss. 1969); Ladnier v. State, 254 Miss. 469 , 182 So.2d 389 (1966); Brown v. State, 224 Miss. 498 , 80 So.2d 761 (1955); Pegram v. State, 223 Miss. 294 , 78 So.2d 153 (1955); Floyd v. State, 166 Miss. 15 , 148 So. 226 (1933). 1979Cummings v. State, 219 So.2d 673 (Miss. 1969); Ladnier v. State, 254 Miss. 469 , 182 So.2d 389 (1966); Brown v. State, 224 Miss. 498 , 80 So.2d 761 (1955); Pegram v. State, 223 Miss. 294 , 78 So.2d 153 (1955); Floyd v. State, 166 Miss. 15 , 148 So. 226 (1933). | 2 | 1979–1999 |
Ladnier v. State
green
2 sentences1999Cummings v. State, 219 So.2d 673 (Miss. 1969); Ladnier v. State, 254 Miss. 469 , 182 So.2d 389 (1966); Brown v. State, 224 Miss. 498 , 80 So.2d 761 (1955); Pegram v. State, 223 Miss. 294 , 78 So.2d 153 (1955); Floyd v. State, 166 Miss. 15 , 148 So. 226 (1933). 1999Cummings v. State, 219 So.2d 673 (Miss. 1969); Ladnier v. State, 254 Miss. 469 , 182 So.2d 389 (1966); Brown v. State, 224 Miss. 498 , 80 So.2d 761 (1955); Pegram v. State, 223 Miss. 294 , 78 So.2d 153 (1955); Floyd v. State, 166 Miss. 15 , 148 So. 226 (1933). | 2 | 1979–1999 |
Brown v. State
green
2 sentences1999Cummings v. State, 219 So.2d 673 (Miss. 1969); Ladnier v. State, 254 Miss. 469 , 182 So.2d 389 (1966); Brown v. State, 224 Miss. 498 , 80 So.2d 761 (1955); Pegram v. State, 223 Miss. 294 , 78 So.2d 153 (1955); Floyd v. State, 166 Miss. 15 , 148 So. 226 (1933). 1999Cummings v. State, 219 So.2d 673 (Miss. 1969); Ladnier v. State, 254 Miss. 469 , 182 So.2d 389 (1966); Brown v. State, 224 Miss. 498 , 80 So.2d 761 (1955); Pegram v. State, 223 Miss. 294 , 78 So.2d 153 (1955); Floyd v. State, 166 Miss. 15 , 148 So. 226 (1933). | 2 | 1979–1999 |
Riley v. Clayton
green
1 sentence1992In Riley v. Clayton, 441 So.2d 1322 (Miss. 1983), this Court stated the general rule for determining when violations of voting procedures would render the votes cast invalid. | 1 | 1992–1992 |
Rayburn v. State
green
1 sentence1986Perhaps, the best single explanation of the principles undergirding Rule 42 is stated in Rayburn v. State, 312 So.2d 454 (Miss. 1975), wherein the Court stated: It is essential that specific objections to instructions be made to the trial judge, in order that errors and omissions may be corrected or supplied before any possible harm can result. | 1 | 1986–1986 |
Williams v. State
green
1 sentence1986In Williams v. State, 445 So.2d 798 (Miss. 1984), the Court stated the general rule first mentioned above and then said the following: Moreover, the ground relied upon in the assignment of error should be one of the grounds stated in the objection to the lower court... . | 1 | 1986–1986 |
Anderson v. State
green
1 sentence1983This Court stated the general rule on the admissibility of the victim's outcry after being raped in Anderson v. State, 82 Miss. 784, 788 , 35 So. 202 , 203 (1903): Ordinarily any and all statements made by a party assaulted after the commission of the crime is hearsay, and not admissible. | 1 | 1983–1983 |
McCullough v. Swifton Consolidated School District
green
2 sentences1980In Newell, supra, property had been conveyed to Franklin County, the deed providing that the "land shall revert to the grantor herein, his heirs and assigns when it fails to be used for school purposes." In deciding that no forfeiture had occurred under the facts of that case, this Court stated the general rule: "[I]t is well established that a forfeiture will not be implied unless the evidence to that effect is clear and convincing. *934 19 Am.Jur., Estates, Sec. 65; 4 Thompson, Real Property, Secs. 2044, 2063, 2096; 47 Am.Jur., Schools, Sec. 69." The Court also said: "[Proof of] an abandonme 1980In Newell, supra, property had been conveyed to Franklin County, the deed providing that the "land shall revert to the grantor herein, his heirs and assigns when it fails to be used for school purposes." In deciding that no forfeiture had occurred under the facts of that case, this Court stated the general rule: "[I]t is well established that a forfeiture will not be implied unless the evidence to that effect is clear and convincing. *934 19 Am.Jur., Estates, Sec. 65; 4 Thompson, Real Property, Secs. 2044, 2063, 2096; 47 Am.Jur., Schools, Sec. 69." The Court also said: "[Proof of] an abandonme | 1 | 1980–1980 |
Sumrall v. State
green
1 sentence1979In the first decision of Sumrall v. State, 257 So.2d 853 , 854 (Miss. 1972), the Court stated the general rule as follows: It is a well-settled general rule that the issue on a criminal trial should be single and that the testimony should be confined *Page 224 to that issue and on the trial for one offense the prosecution should not be allowed to aid the proof against the defendant by showing he committed other offenses, even though of a like nature. | 1 | 1979–1979 |
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.