defendant makes claim in Connecticut

55 Connecticut opinions name it 3 courts 1939–2022 2 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Connecticut 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.

Followed or applied (18)

Case	Followed	Cited
State v. Rowegreen conn · 2006 · cited in 2 Connecticut opinions naming this issue, 2007–2007 2 sentences 2007See State v. Rowe, 279 Conn. 139, 152 , 900 A.2d 1276 (2006). 2007See State v. Rowe, 279 Conn. 139, 152 , 900 A.2d 1276 (2006).	2	2
State v. Goldinggreen conn · 1989 · cited in 3 Connecticut opinions naming this issue, 1990–2022 2 sentences 2022State v. Qayyum, supra, 201 Conn. App. 879 n.3. ‘‘Although a defendant is entitled to review of unpreserved errors of constitutional magnitude under [State v. Golding, 213 Conn. 233 , 239–40, 567 A.2d 823 (1989), as modified by In re Yasiel R., 317 Conn. 773 , 781, 120 A.3d 1188 (2015)], the defendant makes no claim that the admission of the testimony that he challenges on appeal rises to the level of a constitutional violation.’’ (Emphasis omitted.) State v. Gonzalez, 272 Conn. 515, 540 , 864 A.2d 847 (2005). 6 During oral argument before this court, the defendant’s appellate counsel was aske 2022State v. Qayyum, supra, 201 Conn. App. 879 n.3. ‘‘Although a defendant is entitled to review of unpreserved errors of constitutional magnitude under [State v. Golding, 213 Conn. 233 , 239–40, 567 A.2d 823 (1989), as modified by In re Yasiel R., 317 Conn. 773 , 781, 120 A.3d 1188 (2015)], the defendant makes no claim that the admission of the testimony that he challenges on appeal rises to the level of a constitutional violation.’’ (Emphasis omitted.) State v. Gonzalez, 272 Conn. 515, 540 , 864 A.2d 847 (2005). 6 During oral argument before this court, the defendant’s appellate counsel was aske	1	3
State v. Geislergreen conn · 1992 · cited in 2 Connecticut opinions naming this issue, 1995–2017 2 sentences 1995Thus, he claims that, “if the prosecutor’s conduct has run afoul of the Bat-son standards, a fortiori the defendant’s rights to a fair cross-section jury panel under article first, §§ 1 and 8, have been infringed.” Because the defendant makes this claim without adequate analysis under the state constitution; see State v. Geisler, 222 Conn. 672, 685 , 610 A.2d 1225 (1992) (analysis should include examination of [1] text of constitutional provisions, [2] state case law interpreting provisions, [3] federal precedent, [4] precedent of other jurisdictions, [5] historical factors, and [6] economic o 1995Thus, he claims that, “if the prosecutor’s conduct has run afoul of the Bat-son standards, a fortiori the defendant’s rights to a fair cross-section jury panel under article first, §§ 1 and 8, have been infringed.” Because the defendant makes this claim without adequate analysis under the state constitution; see State v. Geisler, 222 Conn. 672, 685 , 610 A.2d 1225 (1992) (analysis should include examination of [1] text of constitutional provisions, [2] state case law interpreting provisions, [3] federal precedent, [4] precedent of other jurisdictions, [5] historical factors, and [6] economic o	1	2
Batson v. Kentuckygreen scotus · 1986 · cited in 2 Connecticut opinions naming this issue, 1988–2014 2 sentences 2014See id., 96–98. 1988We note that the holding in Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 , 106 S. Ct. 1712 , 90 L.	1	2
Miranda v. Arizonagreen scotus · 1966 · cited in 2 Connecticut opinions naming this issue, 1979–1987 2 sentences 1987“We have held: ‘Although the Miranda warnings were originally effective in state prosecutions only because they were a component of due process of law under the fourteenth amendment; Miranda v. Arizona, [ 384 U.S. 436, 463-65 , 86 S. Ct. 1602 , 16 L. 1987“We have held: ‘Although the Miranda warnings were originally effective in state prosecutions only because they were a component of due process of law under the fourteenth amendment; Miranda v. Arizona, [ 384 U.S. 436, 463-65 , 86 S. Ct. 1602 , 16 L.	1	2
State v. Jonesgreen connappct · 2013 · cited in 1 Connecticut opinions naming this issue, 2019–2019 2 sentences 2019See State v. Jones , 140 Conn. App. 455 , 466, 59 A.3d 320 (2013) ("there exists no legal basis that suggests that our state constitution provides the defendant any broader protection to confront a witness against him"), aff'd, 314 Conn. 410 , 102 A.3d 694 (2014). 2019See State v. Jones , 140 Conn. App. 455 , 466, 59 A.3d 320 (2013) ("there exists no legal basis that suggests that our state constitution provides the defendant any broader protection to confront a witness against him"), aff'd, 314 Conn. 410 , 102 A.3d 694 (2014).	1	1
State v. Seeleygreen conn · 2017 · cited in 1 Connecticut opinions naming this issue, 2018–2018 2 sentences 2018See State v. Seeley , 326 Conn. 65 , 67 n.3, 161 A.3d 1278 (2017) ("[W]hen a motion for [a judgment of acquittal] at the close of the state's evidence is denied, a defendant may not secure appellate review of the trial court's ruling without [forgoing] the right to put on evidence in his or her own behalf. 2018See State v. Seeley , 326 Conn. 65 , 67 n.3, 161 A.3d 1278 (2017) ("[W]hen a motion for [a judgment of acquittal] at the close of the state's evidence is denied, a defendant may not secure appellate review of the trial court's ruling without [forgoing] the right to put on evidence in his or her own behalf.	1	1
State v. Sealygreen conn · 1988 · cited in 1 Connecticut opinions naming this issue, 2014–2014 1 sentence 2014We also note that the mere fact that someone uses a prohibited weapon in a manner other than that for which it is manufactured would not alter the classification of the item. 13 See footnote 8 of this opinion. 14 See State v. Campbell, 116 Conn. App. 440 , 445 n.3, 975 A.2d 757 (2009) (‘‘the [trial] court [improperly] characterized the residence or place of abode exception as the second element of the crime’’ under § 53-206 [b] because ‘‘[t]he claim that a defendant is within his residence or place of abode while possessing the weapon is a defense to the crime of carrying a dangerous weapon, n	1	1
State v. Valinskigreen conn · 2000 · cited in 1 Connecticut opinions naming this issue, 2014–2014 2 sentences 2014We also note that the mere fact that someone uses a prohibited weapon in a manner other than that for which it is manufactured would not alter the classification of the item. 13 See footnote 8 of this opinion. 14 See State v. Campbell, 116 Conn. App. 440 , 445 n.3, 975 A.2d 757 (2009) (‘‘the [trial] court [improperly] characterized the residence or place of abode exception as the second element of the crime’’ under § 53-206 [b] because ‘‘[t]he claim that a defendant is within his residence or place of abode while possessing the weapon is a defense to the crime of carrying a dangerous weapon, n 2014We also note that the mere fact that someone uses a prohibited weapon in a manner other than that for which it is manufactured would not alter the classification of the item. 13 See footnote 8 of this opinion. 14 See State v. Campbell, 116 Conn. App. 440 , 445 n.3, 975 A.2d 757 (2009) (‘‘the [trial] court [improperly] characterized the residence or place of abode exception as the second element of the crime’’ under § 53-206 [b] because ‘‘[t]he claim that a defendant is within his residence or place of abode while possessing the weapon is a defense to the crime of carrying a dangerous weapon, n	1	1
United States v. Gonzalez-Lopezgreen scotus · 2006 · cited in 1 Connecticut opinions naming this issue, 2006–2006 2 sentences 2006See United States v. Gonzalez-Lopez, 548 U.S. 140 , 126 S. Ct. 2557 , 165 L. 2006See United States v. Gonzalez-Lopez, 548 U.S. 140 , 126 S. Ct. 2557 , 165 L.	1	1
State v. Careygreen conn · 1994 · cited in 1 Connecticut opinions naming this issue, 2003–2003	1	1
Billington v. Billingtongreen conn · 1991 · cited in 1 Connecticut opinions naming this issue, 1999–1999	1	1
State v. Ephraimgreen conn · 1992 · cited in 1 Connecticut opinions naming this issue, 1995–1995	1	1
State v. Lagogreen conn · 1992 · cited in 1 Connecticut opinions naming this issue, 1995–1995	1	1
State v. Ephraimgreen connappct · 1992 · cited in 1 Connecticut opinions naming this issue, 1995–1995	1	1
State v. McMurraygreen conn · 1991 · cited in 1 Connecticut opinions naming this issue, 1992–1992	1	1
State v. Wallacegreen conn · 1980 · cited in 1 Connecticut opinions naming this issue, 1984–1984	1	1
Michigan v. Mosleygreen scotus · 1975 · cited in 1 Connecticut opinions naming this issue, 1984–1984	1	1

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

Case	Negative	Cited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Connecticut. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (52)

Case	Cited	Years
State v. Nieves green conn · 2005 2 sentences 2019On point with this case is State v. Nieves, 89 Conn. App. 410, 417 , 873 A.2d 1066 , cert. denied, 275 Conn. 906 , 882 A.2d 679 (2005). 2019On point with this case is State v. Nieves, 89 Conn. App. 410, 417 , 873 A.2d 1066 , cert. denied, 275 Conn. 906 , 882 A.2d 679 (2005).	2	2019–2019
State v. Russo green conn · 2005 2 sentences 2019On point with this case is State v. Nieves, 89 Conn. App. 410, 417 , 873 A.2d 1066 , cert. denied, 275 Conn. 906 , 882 A.2d 679 (2005). 2019On point with this case is State v. Nieves, 89 Conn. App. 410, 417 , 873 A.2d 1066 , cert. denied, 275 Conn. 906 , 882 A.2d 679 (2005).	2	2019–2019
State v. Nieves green connappct · 2005 2 sentences 2019On point with this case is State v. Nieves, 89 Conn. App. 410, 417 , 873 A.2d 1066 , cert. denied, 275 Conn. 906 , 882 A.2d 679 (2005). 2019On point with this case is State v. Nieves, 89 Conn. App. 410, 417 , 873 A.2d 1066 , cert. denied, 275 Conn. 906 , 882 A.2d 679 (2005).	2	2019–2019
Nowak v. Nowak green conn · 1978 2 sentences 1994Clearly, it is not; Nowak v. Nowak, 175 Conn. 112 , 116 (1978); P.B. 1994Clearly, it is not; Nowak v. Nowak, 175 Conn. 112 , 116 (1978); P.B.	2	1994–1994
State v. Gonzalez green conn · 2005 2 sentences 2022State v. Qayyum, supra, 201 Conn. App. 879 n.3. ‘‘Although a defendant is entitled to review of unpreserved errors of constitutional magnitude under [State v. Golding, 213 Conn. 233 , 239–40, 567 A.2d 823 (1989), as modified by In re Yasiel R., 317 Conn. 773 , 781, 120 A.3d 1188 (2015)], the defendant makes no claim that the admission of the testimony that he challenges on appeal rises to the level of a constitutional violation.’’ (Emphasis omitted.) State v. Gonzalez, 272 Conn. 515, 540 , 864 A.2d 847 (2005). 6 During oral argument before this court, the defendant’s appellate counsel was aske 2022State v. Qayyum, supra, 201 Conn. App. 879 n.3. ‘‘Although a defendant is entitled to review of unpreserved errors of constitutional magnitude under [State v. Golding, 213 Conn. 233 , 239–40, 567 A.2d 823 (1989), as modified by In re Yasiel R., 317 Conn. 773 , 781, 120 A.3d 1188 (2015)], the defendant makes no claim that the admission of the testimony that he challenges on appeal rises to the level of a constitutional violation.’’ (Emphasis omitted.) State v. Gonzalez, 272 Conn. 515, 540 , 864 A.2d 847 (2005). 6 During oral argument before this court, the defendant’s appellate counsel was aske	1	2022–2022
State v. Coleman green conn · 1997 1 sentence 2021Id., 527 .	1	2021–2021
State v. Ayala green conn · 2017 2 sentences 2021In any event, ‘‘[b]efore the commencement of trial, a prosecutor has broad authority to amend an information under Prac- tice Book § [36-17]’’; (internal quotation marks omitted) State v. Ayala, 324 Conn. 571, 585 , 153 A.3d 588 (2017); and the defendant makes no claim on appeal that the filing of the kidnapping charges by the state was vindictive or otherwise improper. 12 The defendant’s claim of a due process violation is limited to the federal constitution; he makes no claim under the due process provisions of the state constitution. 13 The state also argues in the alternative that the defe 2021In any event, ‘‘[b]efore the commencement of trial, a prosecutor has broad authority to amend an information under Prac- tice Book § [36-17]’’; (internal quotation marks omitted) State v. Ayala, 324 Conn. 571, 585 , 153 A.3d 588 (2017); and the defendant makes no claim on appeal that the filing of the kidnapping charges by the state was vindictive or otherwise improper. 12 The defendant’s claim of a due process violation is limited to the federal constitution; he makes no claim under the due process provisions of the state constitution. 13 The state also argues in the alternative that the defe	1	2021–2021
Traylor v. Gambrell green conn · 2018 1 sentence 2020See State v. Baccala, supra, 326 Conn. 251–56. 7 Specifically, we certified the following issue: ‘‘Did the Appellate Court properly conclude that the defendant’s conviction for breach of the peace in the second degree had to be reversed in light of the holding in [Baccala] . . . ?’’ (Citation omitted.) State v. Liebenguth, supra, 330 Conn. 901 . 8 The defendant makes no claim that, in the event we disagree with the Appellate Court that his speech was protected by the first amendment to the United States constitution, his conviction nevertheless was barred by the free speech provisions of artic	1	2020–2020
State v. Floyd green conn · 1991 2 sentences 2018"A party attacking the constitutionality of a validly enacted statute bears the heavy burden of proving its unconstitutionality beyond a reasonable doubt." State v. Floyd , 217 Conn. 73 , 79, 584 A.2d 1157 (1991). 2018"A party attacking the constitutionality of a validly enacted statute bears the heavy burden of proving its unconstitutionality beyond a reasonable doubt." State v. Floyd , 217 Conn. 73 , 79, 584 A.2d 1157 (1991).	1	2018–2018
Riffin v. Surface Transp. Bd. green scotus · 2016 1 sentence 2018"The constitutionality of a statute presents a question of law over which our review is *303 plenary." (Internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Book , 155 Conn. App. 560 , 564, 109 A.3d 1027 , cert. denied, 318 Conn. 901 , 122 A.3d 632 (2015), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 136 S.Ct. 2029 , 195 L.Ed.2d 219 (2016).	1	2018–2018
Garcia v. Johnson green scotus · 2016 1 sentence 2018"The constitutionality of a statute presents a question of law over which our review is *303 plenary." (Internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Book , 155 Conn. App. 560 , 564, 109 A.3d 1027 , cert. denied, 318 Conn. 901 , 122 A.3d 632 (2015), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 136 S.Ct. 2029 , 195 L.Ed.2d 219 (2016).	1	2018–2018
State v. Campbell neutral connappct · 2009 2 sentences 2014We also note that the mere fact that someone uses a prohibited weapon in a manner other than that for which it is manufactured would not alter the classification of the item. 13 See footnote 8 of this opinion. 14 See State v. Campbell, 116 Conn. App. 440 , 445 n.3, 975 A.2d 757 (2009) (‘‘the [trial] court [improperly] characterized the residence or place of abode exception as the second element of the crime’’ under § 53-206 [b] because ‘‘[t]he claim that a defendant is within his residence or place of abode while possessing the weapon is a defense to the crime of carrying a dangerous weapon, n 2014We also note that the mere fact that someone uses a prohibited weapon in a manner other than that for which it is manufactured would not alter the classification of the item. 13 See footnote 8 of this opinion. 14 See State v. Campbell, 116 Conn. App. 440 , 445 n.3, 975 A.2d 757 (2009) (‘‘the [trial] court [improperly] characterized the residence or place of abode exception as the second element of the crime’’ under § 53-206 [b] because ‘‘[t]he claim that a defendant is within his residence or place of abode while possessing the weapon is a defense to the crime of carrying a dangerous weapon, n	1	2014–2014
Gordon v. HNS MANAGEMENT CO., INC. green conn · 2004 2 sentences 2014Management Co., 272 Conn. 81, 98 , 861 A.2d 1160 (2004) (identifying ‘‘criteria for determining whether a corporate entity is an arm of the state entitled to assert sovereign immunity as a defense’’); the defendant makes no claim, and there is no evidence in the record or finding by the trial court, that the corporation meets these criteria. 2014Management Co., 272 Conn. 81, 98 , 861 A.2d 1160 (2004) (identifying ‘‘criteria for determining whether a corporate entity is an arm of the state entitled to assert sovereign immunity as a defense’’); the defendant makes no claim, and there is no evidence in the record or finding by the trial court, that the corporation meets these criteria.	1	2014–2014
State v. Campbell green conn · 2011 2 sentences 2014We also note that the mere fact that someone uses a prohibited weapon in a manner other than that for which it is manufactured would not alter the classification of the item. 13 See footnote 8 of this opinion. 14 See State v. Campbell, 116 Conn. App. 440 , 445 n.3, 975 A.2d 757 (2009) (‘‘the [trial] court [improperly] characterized the residence or place of abode exception as the second element of the crime’’ under § 53-206 [b] because ‘‘[t]he claim that a defendant is within his residence or place of abode while possessing the weapon is a defense to the crime of carrying a dangerous weapon, n 2014We also note that the mere fact that someone uses a prohibited weapon in a manner other than that for which it is manufactured would not alter the classification of the item. 13 See footnote 8 of this opinion. 14 See State v. Campbell, 116 Conn. App. 440 , 445 n.3, 975 A.2d 757 (2009) (‘‘the [trial] court [improperly] characterized the residence or place of abode exception as the second element of the crime’’ under § 53-206 [b] because ‘‘[t]he claim that a defendant is within his residence or place of abode while possessing the weapon is a defense to the crime of carrying a dangerous weapon, n	1	2014–2014
Lach v. Welch green conn · 1998 1 sentence 2013Moreover, the prosecutor’s act of pursuing the charges against the defendant “authenticated the information even more effectively than his signature could have done.” Id., 581 .	1	2013–2013
McBurney v. Cirillo green conn · 2006 2 sentences 2009The defendant makes no claim on appeal with respect to that finding. 2 General Statutes § 47-37 provides: “No person may acquire a right-of-way or any other easement from, in, upon or over the land of another, by 192 the adverse use or enjoyment thereof, unless the use has been continued uninterrupted for fifteen years.” 3 We note that “[i]f one party’s period of use or possession is insufficient to satisfy the fifteen year requirement, that party may ‘tack on’ the period of use or possession of someone who is in privity with the party, a relationship that may be established by showing a tran 2009The defendant makes no claim on appeal with respect to that finding. 2 General Statutes § 47-37 provides: “No person may acquire a right-of-way or any other easement from, in, upon or over the land of another, by 192 the adverse use or enjoyment thereof, unless the use has been continued uninterrupted for fifteen years.” 3 We note that “[i]f one party’s period of use or possession is insufficient to satisfy the fifteen year requirement, that party may ‘tack on’ the period of use or possession of someone who is in privity with the party, a relationship that may be established by showing a tran	1	2009–2009
In Re Allison G. green conn · 2005 2 sentences 2009In this instance, the defendant makes no such claim; rather, he claims to be aggrieved by a pretrial decision of the court not connected to its judgment. [2] For example, in the matter of In re Allison G., 276 Conn. 146 , 883 A.2d 1226 (2005), our Supreme Court permitted an appeal by the department of children and families (department) even though the trial court had found in favor of the department on one count of a two count petition alleging, in one count that the child was uncared for and, in another count, that the child was neglected. 2009In this instance, the defendant makes no such claim; rather, he claims to be aggrieved by a pretrial decision of the court not connected to its judgment. [2] For example, in the matter of In re Allison G., 276 Conn. 146 , 883 A.2d 1226 (2005), our Supreme Court permitted an appeal by the department of children and families (department) even though the trial court had found in favor of the department on one count of a two count petition alleging, in one count that the child was uncared for and, in another count, that the child was neglected.	1	2009–2009
Swenson v. Dittner green conn · 1981 2 sentences 2009The essential elements are a use which is open, visible, continuous and uninterrupted for fifteen years and made under a claim of right.” (Citations omitted.) Swenson v. Dittner, 183 Conn. 289, 294 , 439 A.2d 334 (1981). 2009The essential elements are a use which is open, visible, continuous and uninterrupted for fifteen years and made under a claim of right.” (Citations omitted.) Swenson v. Dittner, 183 Conn. 289, 294 , 439 A.2d 334 (1981).	1	2009–2009
State v. Hernandez green conn · 1991 2 sentences 2008Cf. State v. Hernandez, 218 Conn. 458 , 590 A.2d 112 (1991). 2008Cf. State v. Hernandez, 218 Conn. 458 , 590 A.2d 112 (1991).	1	2008–2008
State v. Tomasko green conn · 1996 2 sentences 2007Because the defendant has failed to provide analysis in pursuit of his claim, we decline to afford them review. [3] The defendant was charged with nine counts related to his sexual assault of C and H on September 12, 2002, and his sexual assault of K between October, 1994, and October, 1996. [4] Additional facts will be referred to where they are pertinent to a discussion of a specific claim of error. [5] The defendant makes no claim that the state violated Connecticut's wiretapping statutes, General Statutes § 54-41a et seq. [6] We note that although the court denied the defendant's motion to 2007Because the defendant has failed to provide analysis in pursuit of his claim, we decline to afford them review. [3] The defendant was charged with nine counts related to his sexual assault of C and H on September 12, 2002, and his sexual assault of K between October, 1994, and October, 1996. [4] Additional facts will be referred to where they are pertinent to a discussion of a specific claim of error. [5] The defendant makes no claim that the state violated Connecticut's wiretapping statutes, General Statutes § 54-41a et seq. [6] We note that although the court denied the defendant's motion to	1	2007–2007
State v. Padua green conn · 2005	1	2006–2006
State v. DePastino green conn · 1994	1	2005–2005
State v. Ramos green conn · 2002	1	2004–2004
Bryan v. Commissioner of Public Health green conn · 2002	1	2004–2004
State v. Jordan green connappct · 2001	1	2004–2004
State v. Smith green connappct · 2002	1	2004–2004
State v. Gray green conn · 1986	1	2003–2003
Brown v. North Carolina green scotus · 1986	1	2003–2003
Singh v. Singh green conn · 1990	1	1999–1999
Lomas & Nettleton Co. v. City of Waterbury green conn · 1936	1	1999–1999
Malloy v. Hogan green scotus · 1964	1	1996–1996
Whalen v. United States green scotus · 1980	1	1991–1991
Eamiello v. Liberty Mobile Home Sales, Inc. green conn · 1988	1	1988–1988
State v. Foshay green connappct · 1987	1	1988–1988
State v. Evans green conn · 1973	1	1985–1985
Hess v. Pawloski green scotus · 1927	1	1983–1983
Taylor v. Robinson green conn · 1976	1	1982–1982
Amato v. Desenti green conn · 1933	1	1977–1977
State v. Mullings green conn · 1974	1	1976–1976
State v. Annunziato green conn · 1975	1	1976–1976

Statutes the citing opinions construe

CT § Conn. Gen. Stat. § 53a-54a (10) CT § Conn. Gen. Stat. § 53a-134 (7) CT § Conn. Gen. Stat. § 53a-70 (7) CT § Conn. Gen. Stat. § 4-5 (6) CT § Conn. Gen. Stat. § 51-199 (6) CT § Conn. Gen. Stat. § 53a-49 (6) CT § Conn. Gen. Stat. § 1-1 (5) CT § Conn. Gen. Stat. § 53-21 (5) CT § Conn. Gen. Stat. § 53a-3 (4) CT § Conn. Gen. Stat. § 53a-48 (4) CT § Conn. Gen. Stat. § 53a-59 (4) CT § Conn. Gen. Stat. § 53a-65 (4)

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.

Where else courts name it

IL 115 (1946–2026) CT 55 (1939–2022) MA 47 (1914–2026) TX 24 (1992–2022) AR 21 (1999–2024) NY 17 (1889–2010) PA 12 (1911–2025) AL 11 (1998–2011) MI 9 (1939–2017) OH 8 (2002–2024) CA 7 (1921–2015) FL 6 (1983–2010) NC 6 (2004–2024) WA 5 (1982–1999) VT 5 (1926–1973) KS 5 (1911–2006) TN 4 (1998–2015) IN 4 (1975–2008) NH 4 (1993–2013) GA 4 (1923–2021) NM 3 (2012–2014) LA 3 (1984–1999) RI 3 (1989–2000) MO 3 (1986–2013) WI 3 (1974–2012) KY 2 (1952–2010) WV 2 (2014–2020) AZ 2 (1971–2014) IA 2 (1929–2019) OR 2 (1980–2016)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check