8 Tennessee opinions name it 3 courts 1953–2024 1 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Tennessee 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 |
|---|---|---|
Roberts v. United Statesgreen2 sentences2019See generally Roberts v. United States, 445 U.S. 552, 559 (1980). 2005See Roberts v. United States, 445 U.S. 552, 559 , 100 S. Ct. 1358, 1364 (1980). | 2 | 2 |
Neal Lovlace v. Timothy Kevin Copleygreen2 sentences2024So, “in initial proceedings to determine grandparent visitation,” parents may “rely upon the protection of the presumption of superior parental rights.” Lovlace v. Copley, 418 S.W.3d 1, 30 (Tenn. 2013). 2024But the presumption can be rebutted by a showing that the denial of grandparent “visitation would result in substantial harm to the child and that grandparent visitation would be in the child’s best interests.” Id. | 1 | 1 |
Hogue v. Hoguegreen1 sentence2015He points to the trial court‟s rulings that the defendant “came about” Ms. Daniel at the shopping plaza and “came about” Ms. Daniel‟s residence while traveling to a cookout to illustrate that the language of the order of protection was ambiguous. „“Since an injunctive order prohibits conduct under threat of judicial punishment, basic fairness requires that those enjoined receive explicit notice of precisely what conduct is outlawed.‟” Hogue v. Hogue, 147 S.W.3d 245, 249 (quoting Schmidt v. Lessard, 414 U.S. 473, 476 (1974)). | 1 | 1 |
Schmidt v. Lessardgreen1 sentence2015He points to the trial court‟s rulings that the defendant “came about” Ms. Daniel at the shopping plaza and “came about” Ms. Daniel‟s residence while traveling to a cookout to illustrate that the language of the order of protection was ambiguous. „“Since an injunctive order prohibits conduct under threat of judicial punishment, basic fairness requires that those enjoined receive explicit notice of precisely what conduct is outlawed.‟” Hogue v. Hogue, 147 S.W.3d 245, 249 (quoting Schmidt v. Lessard, 414 U.S. 473, 476 (1974)). | 1 | 1 |
Rogers v. United Statesgreen2 sentences2008Garner v. U.S., 424 U.S. 648, 654-55 , 96 S.Ct. 1178, 1182 (1976); Rogers v. U.S., 340 U.S. 367, 370 , 71 S.Ct. 438, 440 (1951). 2008Garner v. U.S., 424 U.S. 648, 654-55 , 96 S.Ct. 1178, 1182 (1976); Rogers v. U.S., 340 U.S. 367, 370 , 71 S.Ct. 438, 440 (1951). | 1 | 1 |
Garner v. United Statesgreen2 sentences2008Garner v. U.S., 424 U.S. 648, 654-55 , 96 S.Ct. 1178, 1182 (1976); Rogers v. U.S., 340 U.S. 367, 370 , 71 S.Ct. 438, 440 (1951). 2008Garner v. U.S., 424 U.S. 648, 654-55 , 96 S.Ct. 1178, 1182 (1976); Rogers v. U.S., 340 U.S. 367, 370 , 71 S.Ct. 438, 440 (1951). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Tennessee. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Hickman v. Taylor
green
2 sentences1967Section 24-1205, T.C.A. provides that the Trial Judge may limit the manner of taking or the scope of examination * * where the requesting party has not, in the discretion of the court, used diligence to discover such things for himself.” As this Court observed in Price v. Basham an unreported opinion by Judge Humphreys filed May 22,1962, the finding of witnesses cannot fairly be said to be the work product of a lawyer and on that account within the protection of that doctrine as discussed in Hickman v. Taylor, 329 U.S. 495 , 67 S.Ct. 385 , 91 L.Ed. 451 and other cases cited, since, as said by 1967Section 24-1205, T.C.A. provides that the Trial Judge may limit the manner of taking or the scope of examination * * where the requesting party has not, in the discretion of the court, used diligence to discover such things for himself.” As this Court observed in Price v. Basham an unreported opinion by Judge Humphreys filed May 22,1962, the finding of witnesses cannot fairly be said to be the work product of a lawyer and on that account within the protection of that doctrine as discussed in Hickman v. Taylor, 329 U.S. 495 , 67 S.Ct. 385 , 91 L.Ed. 451 and other cases cited, since, as said by | 1 | 1967–1967 |
Puckett v. Broome
green
2 sentences1967Section 24-1205, T.C.A. provides that the Trial Judge may limit the manner of taking or the scope of examination * * where the requesting party has not, in the discretion of the court, used diligence to discover such things for himself.” As this Court observed in Price v. Basham an unreported opinion by Judge Humphreys filed May 22,1962, the finding of witnesses cannot fairly be said to be the work product of a lawyer and on that account within the protection of that doctrine as discussed in Hickman v. Taylor, 329 U.S. 495 , 67 S.Ct. 385 , 91 L.Ed. 451 and other cases cited, since, as said by 1967Section 24-1205, T.C.A. provides that the Trial Judge may limit the manner of taking or the scope of examination * * where the requesting party has not, in the discretion of the court, used diligence to discover such things for himself.” As this Court observed in Price v. Basham an unreported opinion by Judge Humphreys filed May 22,1962, the finding of witnesses cannot fairly be said to be the work product of a lawyer and on that account within the protection of that doctrine as discussed in Hickman v. Taylor, 329 U.S. 495 , 67 S.Ct. 385 , 91 L.Ed. 451 and other cases cited, since, as said by | 1 | 1967–1967 |
Medic Ambulance Service, Inc. v. McAdams
green
2 sentences1967In' Medic Ambulance Service v. McAdams, 216 Tenn. 304 , 392 S.W.2d 103 , in an opinion by Mr. Justice Chattin it was said: “The statute in reference to discovery depositions is predicated upon the presumption that it may be allowed by the trial judge. 1967In' Medic Ambulance Service v. McAdams, 216 Tenn. 304 , 392 S.W.2d 103 , in an opinion by Mr. Justice Chattin it was said: “The statute in reference to discovery depositions is predicated upon the presumption that it may be allowed by the trial judge. | 1 | 1967–1967 |
Lowell Bar Ass'n v. Loeb
green
2 sentences1959It is not an evil because it takes away business from the lawyers." To the same effect, we quote the language of the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, as follows: "The justification for excluding from the practice of law persons not admitted to the bar is to be found, not in the protection of the bar from competition, but in the protection of the public from being advised and represented in legal matters by incompetent and unreliable persons over whom the judicial department could exercise little control." Lowell Bar Ass'n. v. Loeb, 315 Mass. 176 , 52 N.E.2d 27, 31 . 1959It is not an evil because it takes away business from the lawyers." To the same effect, we quote the language of the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, as follows: "The justification for excluding from the practice of law persons not admitted to the bar is to be found, not in the protection of the bar from competition, but in the protection of the public from being advised and represented in legal matters by incompetent and unreliable persons over whom the judicial department could exercise little control." Lowell Bar Ass'n. v. Loeb, 315 Mass. 176 , 52 N.E.2d 27, 31 . | 1 | 1959–1959 |
Davis v. State
neutral
1 sentence1959Apparently entertaining this same point of view, the Supreme Court of Tennessee, in a disbarment case, said: "This power of disbarment is not exercised by the courts for the purpose of enforcing remedies between the parties, but to protect the court and the public against the official administration of an attorney guilty of unworthy practices in his profession." Davis v. State, 1893, 92 Tenn. 634, 640 , 23 S.W. 59 , 61. | 1 | 1959–1959 |
Mundy v. McDonald
green
2 sentences1953Mundy v. McDonald, 216 Mich. 444 , 185 N. W. 877 , 20 A. L. 1953Mundy v. McDonald, 216 Mich. 444 , 185 N. W. 877 , 20 A. L. | 1 | 1953–1953 |
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.