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.
7 Georgia opinions name it 2 courts 1999–2019 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 |
|---|---|---|
Jenkins v. Stategreen2 sentences2019"Such a broad interpretation of the tolling period would permit the exception to swallow the rule." Jenkins , 278 Ga. at 603 (1) (A), 604 S.E.2d 789 . 2019"Such a broad interpretation of the tolling period would permit the exception to swallow the rule." Jenkins , 278 Ga. at 603 (1) (A), 604 S.E.2d 789 . | 4 | 5 |
Georgia Department of Natural Resources v. Center for a Sustainable Coast, Inc.green2 sentences2019Cf. Ga. Dept. of Natural Resources v. Center for Sustainable Coast, Inc. , 294 Ga. 593 , 600 (2), 755 S.E.2d 184 (2014) (warning against judicial creation of exceptions to sovereign immunity where the exceptions would swallow the rule permitting only the General Assembly to do so). 2019Cf. Ga. Dept. of Natural Resources v. Center for Sustainable Coast, Inc. , 294 Ga. 593 , 600 (2), 755 S.E.2d 184 (2014) (warning against judicial creation of exceptions to sovereign immunity where the exceptions would swallow the rule permitting only the General Assembly to do so). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Georgia. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Chapel v. State
green
1 sentence1999These requirements were borrowed from the "catch-all" hearsay exception in Federal Rule of Evidence 807 and similar state rules of evidence, because "death or unavailability of the declarant cannot alone satisfy the necessity component without allowing the exception to swallow the rule." Chapel v. State, supra at 155(4), 510 S.E.2d 802 . | 1 | 1999–1999 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
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.