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 Nevada opinions name it 1 courts 1970–2019 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Nevada 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 |
|---|---|---|
Dougherty v. Stategreen2 sentences2019See Ramirez v. State, 126 Nev. 203, 210 , 235 P.3d 619, 624 (2010) (reversing where a Labastida instructional error was prejudicial); Dougherty v. State, 86 Nev. 507, 509 , 471 P.2d 212, 213 (1970) (An accurate instruction upon the basic elements of the offense charged is essential, and the failure to so instruct constitutes reversible error."). 2019See Ramirez v. State, 126 Nev. 203, 210 , 235 P.3d 619, 624 (2010) (reversing where a Labastida instructional error was prejudicial); Dougherty v. State, 86 Nev. 507, 509 , 471 P.2d 212, 213 (1970) (An accurate instruction upon the basic elements of the offense charged is essential, and the failure to so instruct constitutes reversible error."). | 3 | 5 |
Ramirez v. Stategreen2 sentences2019See Ramirez v. State, 126 Nev. 203, 210 , 235 P.3d 619, 624 (2010) (reversing where a Labastida instructional error was prejudicial); Dougherty v. State, 86 Nev. 507, 509 , 471 P.2d 212, 213 (1970) (An accurate instruction upon the basic elements of the offense charged is essential, and the failure to so instruct constitutes reversible error."). 2019See Ramirez v. State, 126 Nev. 203, 210 , 235 P.3d 619, 624 (2010) (reversing where a Labastida instructional error was prejudicial); Dougherty v. State, 86 Nev. 507, 509 , 471 P.2d 212, 213 (1970) (An accurate instruction upon the basic elements of the offense charged is essential, and the failure to so instruct constitutes reversible error."). | 1 | 1 |
Greene v. Stategreen2 sentences2013See generally Vallery v. State, 118 Nev. 357, 372 , 46 P.3d 66, 77 (2002) (noting that a district court does not err by refusing an accurate instruction related to the defendant's theory of the case if it is substantially covered by other instructions); see also Greene v. State, 96 Nev. 555, 558 , 612 P.2d 686, 688 (1980) ("The burden to make a proper appellate record rests on appellant."). 2013See generally Vallery v. State, 118 Nev. 357, 372 , 46 P.3d 66, 77 (2002) (noting that a district court does not err by refusing an accurate instruction related to the defendant's theory of the case if it is substantially covered by other instructions); see also Greene v. State, 96 Nev. 555, 558 , 612 P.2d 686, 688 (1980) ("The burden to make a proper appellate record rests on appellant."). | 1 | 1 |
Vallery v. Stategreen2 sentences2013See generally Vallery v. State, 118 Nev. 357, 372 , 46 P.3d 66, 77 (2002) (noting that a district court does not err by refusing an accurate instruction related to the defendant's theory of the case if it is substantially covered by other instructions); see also Greene v. State, 96 Nev. 555, 558 , 612 P.2d 686, 688 (1980) ("The burden to make a proper appellate record rests on appellant."). 2013See generally Vallery v. State, 118 Nev. 357, 372 , 46 P.3d 66, 77 (2002) (noting that a district court does not err by refusing an accurate instruction related to the defendant's theory of the case if it is substantially covered by other instructions); see also Greene v. State, 96 Nev. 555, 558 , 612 P.2d 686, 688 (1980) ("The burden to make a proper appellate record rests on appellant."). | 1 | 1 |
Dunham v. Vaughan & Bushnell Mfg. Co.green1 sentence1970Co., 247 N.E.2d 401, 403 (Ill. 1969), where it was held: “Although the definitions of the term ‘defect’ in the context of products liability law use varying language, all of them rest upon the common premise that those products are defective which are dangerous because they fail to perform in the manner reasonably to be expected in light of their nature and intended function.” As shown by the evidence admitted at trial through Professor Baker, and under the authority of Shoshone and Dun-ham, appellant adduced sufficient proof to be entitled to instruction of the jury on the doctrine of strict | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Nevada. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Harvey v. State
green
2 sentences1980Dougherty v. State, 86 Nev. 507 , 471 P.2d 212 (1970); Harvey v. State, 78 Nev. 417 , 375 P.2d 225 (1962). 1980Dougherty v. State, 86 Nev. 507 , 471 P.2d 212 (1970); Harvey v. State, 78 Nev. 417 , 375 P.2d 225 (1962). | 3 | 1970–1980 |
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.