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.
8 Georgia opinions name it 2 courts 1977–2019 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Georgia 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 |
|---|---|---|
Viskup v. Viskupgreen2 sentences2019As such, "[w]hen the trial court conducts a hearing and makes findings of fact on a motion to dismiss or transfer for improper venue, the findings of fact are tested by the [']any evidence['] rule." Viskup v. Viskup , 291 Ga. 103 , 104 (1), 727 S.E.2d 97 (2012) (citation omitted). 2019As such, "[w]hen the trial court conducts a hearing and makes findings of fact on a motion to dismiss or transfer for improper venue, the findings of fact are tested by the [']any evidence['] rule." Viskup v. Viskup , 291 Ga. 103 , 104 (1), 727 S.E.2d 97 (2012) (citation omitted). | 2 | 3 |
An v. Active Pest Control South, Inc.green2 sentences2013Finally, questions concerning the admissibility of expert opinion “generally are committed to the sound discretion of the trial courts, and questions of the admissibility of expert opinions under [former] OCGA § 24-9-67.1 are no different.” (Citations omitted.) An v. Active Pest Control South, 313 Ga. App. 110, 115 ( 720 SE2d 222 ) (2011). 2013Finally, questions concerning the admissibility of expert opinion “generally are committed to the sound discretion of the trial courts, and questions of the admissibility of expert opinions under [former] OCGA § 24-9-67.1 are no different.” (Citations omitted.) An v. Active Pest Control South, 313 Ga. App. 110, 115 ( 720 SE2d 222 ) (2011). | 2 | 2 |
Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.green2 sentences2013When a trial court conducts a hearing under former OCGA § 24-9-67.1, then, its task is to determine whether scientific or other expert testimony is “not only relevant, but reliable.” Daubert, supra at 589 (II) (B); Kumho, supra at 147 (II) (A) (applying Daubert to “all expert testimony”). 2013When a trial court conducts a hearing under former OCGA § 24-9-67.1, then, its task is to determine whether scientific or other expert testimony is “not only relevant, but reliable.” Daubert, supra at 589 (II) (B); Kumho, 2 supra at 147 (II) (A) (applying Daubert to “all expert testimony”). | 2 | 2 |
Kumho Tire Co. v. Carmichaelgreen2 sentences2013When a trial court conducts a hearing under former OCGA § 24-9-67.1, then, its task is to determine whether scientific or other expert testimony is “not only relevant, but reliable.” Daubert, supra at 589 (II) (B); Kumho, supra at 147 (II) (A) (applying Daubert to “all expert testimony”). 2013When a trial court conducts a hearing under former OCGA § 24-9-67.1, then, its task is to determine whether scientific or other expert testimony is “not only relevant, but reliable.” Daubert, supra at 589 (II) (B); Kumho, 2 supra at 147 (II) (A) (applying Daubert to “all expert testimony”). | 2 | 2 |
Williams v. Stategreen2 sentences2003Unless the defendant places his character in issue at trial, which did not happen in this case, similar bad acts of the accused that were not part of the res gestae of the crime charged can only be admitted if there is notice to the accused, the trial court conducts a hearing, and the party seeking to admit such evidence makes certain affirmative showings. 43 USCR 31.3 (B); Williams v. State, 261 Ga. at 642 (2) (b). 2003Unless the defendant places his character in issue at trial, which did not happen in this case, similar bad acts of the accused that were not part of the res gestae of the crime charged can only be admitted if there is notice to the accused, the trial court conducts a hearing, and the party seeking to admit such evidence makes certain affirmative showings. [43] USCR 31.3(B); Williams v. State, 261 Ga. at 642 (2)(b), 409 S.E.2d 649 (b). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Georgia. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Oglesby v. Deal
green
2 sentences2013“When the trial court conducts a hearing and makes findings of fact on a motion to dismiss or transfer for improper venue, the findings of fact are tested by the any evidence rule.” Viskup v. Viskup, 291 Ga. 103, 104 (1) ( 727 SE2d 97 ) (2012), citing Oglesby v. Deal, 311 Ga. App. 622 ( 716 SE2d 749 ) (2011). 2013“When the trial court conducts a hearing and makes findings of fact on a motion to dismiss or transfer for improper venue, the findings of fact are tested by the any evidence rule.” Viskup v. Viskup, 291 Ga. 103, 104 (1) ( 727 SE2d 97 ) (2012), citing Oglesby v. Deal, 311 Ga. App. 622 ( 716 SE2d 749 ) (2011). | 3 | 2012–2013 |
Jackson v. Denno
green
1 sentence1977He contends that after the trial court conducts a hearing in accordance with Jackson v. Denno, 378 U. S. 368 (84 SC 1774, 12 LE2d 908) (1964),and finds a confession voluntary, the jury cannot pass again on voluntariness. | 1 | 1977–1977 |
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.