8 South Dakota opinions name it 1 courts 1968–2021 1 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by South Dakota 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 |
|---|---|---|
State v. Moriartygreen1 sentence2021See, e.g., State v. Taylor, 2020 S.D. 48 , ¶ 34 n.4, 948 N.W.2d 342 , 352 n.4 (explaining that this Court “ha[s] permitted the State to introduce otherwise inadmissible evidence when a criminal defendant’s trial strategy has ‘opened the door’ to the evidence” (quoting State v. Letcher, 1996 S.D. 88 , ¶ 25, 552 N.W.2d 402, 406 )); State v. Moriarty, 534 N.W.2d 841, 843 (S.D. 1995) (explaining that a party who takes “a calculated risk” by introducing “objectionable evidence” cannot “count on the admission as error”); State v. New, 536 N.W.2d 714, 718 (S.D. 1995) (holding that by strategically pl | 1 | 1 |
State v. Letchergreen1 sentence2021See, e.g., State v. Taylor, 2020 S.D. 48 , ¶ 34 n.4, 948 N.W.2d 342 , 352 n.4 (explaining that this Court “ha[s] permitted the State to introduce otherwise inadmissible evidence when a criminal defendant’s trial strategy has ‘opened the door’ to the evidence” (quoting State v. Letcher, 1996 S.D. 88 , ¶ 25, 552 N.W.2d 402, 406 )); State v. Moriarty, 534 N.W.2d 841, 843 (S.D. 1995) (explaining that a party who takes “a calculated risk” by introducing “objectionable evidence” cannot “count on the admission as error”); State v. New, 536 N.W.2d 714, 718 (S.D. 1995) (holding that by strategically pl | 1 | 1 |
State v. Newgreen1 sentence2021See, e.g., State v. Taylor, 2020 S.D. 48 , ¶ 34 n.4, 948 N.W.2d 342 , 352 n.4 (explaining that this Court “ha[s] permitted the State to introduce otherwise inadmissible evidence when a criminal defendant’s trial strategy has ‘opened the door’ to the evidence” (quoting State v. Letcher, 1996 S.D. 88 , ¶ 25, 552 N.W.2d 402, 406 )); State v. Moriarty, 534 N.W.2d 841, 843 (S.D. 1995) (explaining that a party who takes “a calculated risk” by introducing “objectionable evidence” cannot “count on the admission as error”); State v. New, 536 N.W.2d 714, 718 (S.D. 1995) (holding that by strategically pl | 1 | 1 |
State v. Taylorgreen2 sentences2021See, e.g., State v. Taylor, 2020 S.D. 48 , ¶ 34 n.4, 948 N.W.2d 342 , 352 n.4 (explaining that this Court “ha[s] permitted the State to introduce otherwise inadmissible evidence when a criminal defendant’s trial strategy has ‘opened the door’ to the evidence” (quoting State v. Letcher, 1996 S.D. 88 , ¶ 25, 552 N.W.2d 402, 406 )); State v. Moriarty, 534 N.W.2d 841, 843 (S.D. 1995) (explaining that a party who takes “a calculated risk” by introducing “objectionable evidence” cannot “count on the admission as error”); State v. New, 536 N.W.2d 714, 718 (S.D. 1995) (holding that by strategically pl 2021See, e.g., State v. Taylor, 2020 S.D. 48 , ¶ 34 n.4, 948 N.W.2d 342 , 352 n.4 (explaining that this Court “ha[s] permitted the State to introduce otherwise inadmissible evidence when a criminal defendant’s trial strategy has ‘opened the door’ to the evidence” (quoting State v. Letcher, 1996 S.D. 88 , ¶ 25, 552 N.W.2d 402, 406 )); State v. Moriarty, 534 N.W.2d 841, 843 (S.D. 1995) (explaining that a party who takes “a calculated risk” by introducing “objectionable evidence” cannot “count on the admission as error”); State v. New, 536 N.W.2d 714, 718 (S.D. 1995) (holding that by strategically pl | 1 | 1 |
Yates v. Bair Transport, Inc.green1 sentence2010Yates v. Bair Transp., Inc., 249 F.Supp. 681, 685 (S.D.N.Y.1965). | 1 | 1 |
Kohne v. Yostgreen1 sentence1997The trial court granted the motion for new trial, stating: The alleged admission by defense counsel in this matter does relate to a question of fact — e.g., was plaintiff injured as a result of the accident? [[Image here]] Taken by itself and in context with other statements, the court finds that defense counsel’s acknowledgment during closing-argument of the existence of some pain from the accident, was an unequivocal admission binding upon his client. [[Image here]] To the extent that defense counsel admitted that plaintiff did suffer some injury fi-om the accident, even if nominal, the jury | 1 | 1 |
Childs v. Francogreen1 sentence1997The trial court granted the motion for new trial, stating: The alleged admission by defense counsel in this matter does relate to a question of fact — e.g., was plaintiff injured as a result of the accident? [[Image here]] Taken by itself and in context with other statements, the court finds that defense counsel’s acknowledgment during closing-argument of the existence of some pain from the accident, was an unequivocal admission binding upon his client. [[Image here]] To the extent that defense counsel admitted that plaintiff did suffer some injury fi-om the accident, even if nominal, the jury | 1 | 1 |
Larson v. A.T.S.I.green1 sentence1997The trial court granted the motion for new trial, stating: The alleged admission by defense counsel in this matter does relate to a question of fact — e.g., was plaintiff injured as a result of the accident? [[Image here]] Taken by itself and in context with other statements, the court finds that defense counsel’s acknowledgment during closing-argument of the existence of some pain from the accident, was an unequivocal admission binding upon his client. [[Image here]] To the extent that defense counsel admitted that plaintiff did suffer some injury fi-om the accident, even if nominal, the jury | 1 | 1 |
State v. Hollowaygreen1 sentence1995See State v. Holloway, 482 N.W.2d 306 (S.D.1992); State v. Vogel, 315 N.W.2d 321 (S.D.1982). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in South Dakota. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
In the Matter of Estate of Pringle
green
1 sentence2015As we indicated above, “the successful party is entitled to the benefit of his version of the evidence and of all favorable inferences fairly deducible therefrom.” Fifteen Impounded Cats, 2010 S.D. 50 , ¶ 26, 785 N.W.2d at 282 (quoting In re Estate of Pringle, 2008 S.D. 38 , ¶ 18, 751 N.W.2d at 284 ) (internal quotation mark omitted). | 1 | 2015–2015 |
State v. FIFTEEN IMPOUNDED CATS
green
1 sentence2015As we indicated above, “the successful party is entitled to the benefit of his version of the evidence and of all favorable inferences fairly deducible therefrom.” Fifteen Impounded Cats, 2010 S.D. 50 , ¶ 26, 785 N.W.2d at 282 (quoting In re Estate of Pringle, 2008 S.D. 38 , ¶ 18, 751 N.W.2d at 284 ) (internal quotation mark omitted). | 1 | 2015–2015 |
State v. Vogel
green
1 sentence1995See State v. Holloway, 482 N.W.2d 306 (S.D.1992); State v. Vogel, 315 N.W.2d 321 (S.D.1982). | 1 | 1995–1995 |
Miranda v. Arizona
green
2 sentences1980She maintains that the admission was in violation of her rights under Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 , 86 S.Ct. 1602 , 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966). 1980She maintains that the admission was in violation of her rights under Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 , 86 S.Ct. 1602 , 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966). | 1 | 1980–1980 |
People v. White
green
2 sentences1978People v. White, 1970, 25 Mich.App. 176 , 181 N.W.2d 56 . 1978People v. White, 1970, 25 Mich.App. 176 , 181 N.W.2d 56 . | 1 | 1978–1978 |
House of Seagram, Inc. v. Assam Drug Co.
green
2 sentences1968In House of Seagram, Inc., Seagram Distillers Company Division v. Assam Drug Company, 83 S.D. 320 , 159 N.W.2d 210 , we held that injunctive relief should not be granted unless the fact of free and open competition was established by proof. 1968In House of Seagram, Inc., Seagram Distillers Company Division v. Assam Drug Company, 83 S.D. 320 , 159 N.W.2d 210 , we held that injunctive relief should not be granted unless the fact of free and open competition was established by proof. | 1 | 1968–1968 |
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.