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 Mississippi opinions name it 2 courts 2000–2026 3 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Mississippi 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 |
|---|---|---|
United States v. Harrisgreen1 sentence2023Ed. 1117 (1947)); see also Armstrong v. Guccione, 470 F.3d 89 , 101 (2d Cir. 2006) (seven-year coercive confinement did not violate petitioner’s due process rights); United States v. Harris, 582 F.3d 512, 513 (3d Cir. 2009) (same with five- year coercive confinement); Chadwick v. Janecka, 312 F.3d 597 (3d Cir. 2002) (reversing habeas court’s order releasing a state petitioner from seven-year conditional confinement as there is no federal constitutional bar to petitioner’s “indefinite confinement for civil contempt so long as he retains the ability to comply with the order”). 5 In United States | 1 | 1 |
United States v. Clarence S. Armstrong, William John Williams, and Vincent Sammarcogreen2 sentences2023Ed. 1117 (1947)); see also Armstrong v. Guccione, 470 F.3d 89 , 101 (2d Cir. 2006) (seven-year coercive confinement did not violate petitioner’s due process rights); United States v. Harris, 582 F.3d 512, 513 (3d Cir. 2009) (same with five- year coercive confinement); Chadwick v. Janecka, 312 F.3d 597 (3d Cir. 2002) (reversing habeas court’s order releasing a state petitioner from seven-year conditional confinement as there is no federal constitutional bar to petitioner’s “indefinite confinement for civil contempt so long as he retains the ability to comply with the order”). 5 In United States 2023It “was not intended to serve as a rule to be followed in every case in which criminal contempt sanctions are imposed.” Armstrong, 781 F.2d at 705 (citing Harris v. United States, 382 U.S. 162 , 86 S. Ct. 352 , 15 L. | 1 | 1 |
Armstrong v. Guccionegreen1 sentence2023Ed. 1117 (1947)); see also Armstrong v. Guccione, 470 F.3d 89 , 101 (2d Cir. 2006) (seven-year coercive confinement did not violate petitioner’s due process rights); United States v. Harris, 582 F.3d 512, 513 (3d Cir. 2009) (same with five- year coercive confinement); Chadwick v. Janecka, 312 F.3d 597 (3d Cir. 2002) (reversing habeas court’s order releasing a state petitioner from seven-year conditional confinement as there is no federal constitutional bar to petitioner’s “indefinite confinement for civil contempt so long as he retains the ability to comply with the order”). 5 In United States | 1 | 1 |
Duckworth v. Warrengreen1 sentence2022Specifically, Arrington asserts that the county court improperly made a determination 5 Arrington argues that because Anderson filed the motion as one for summary judgment, then the summary judgment standard must apply: “The evidence must be viewed in the light most favorable to the party against whom the motion has been made.” Duckworth v. Warren, 10 So. 3d 433, 436-37 (¶9) (Miss. 2009). | 1 | 1 |
City of Madison v. Bryangreen2 sentences2017Further, “[t]he fact that a case is weak is not sufficient to find that it was brought to harass.” City of Madison v. Bryan, 763 So. 2d 162, 167 (Miss. 2000) (citing Brown v. Hartford Ins. 2017Further, “[t]he fact that a case is weak is not sufficient to find that it was brought to harass.” City of Madison v. Bryan, 763 So.2d 162, 167 (Miss. 2000) (citing Brown v. Hartford Ins. | 1 | 1 |
Mosley v. Stategreen1 sentence2015Our supreme court has stated that it generally will not challenge the discretion of the trial court in sentencing as long as the sentence falls, within the statutory limits, Mosley v. State, 104 So.3d 839, 841 (¶ 10) (Miss.2012) (citation omitted). | 1 | 1 |
Robertson v. Stategreen1 sentence2000See Robertson v. State, 669 So.2d 11, 13 (Miss.1996); see also Miss.Code Ann. § 99-39-11(2) (Supp. 1999). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Mississippi. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
green
1 sentence2026Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993), as modified in Kumho Tire Co. v. Carmichael, 526 U.S. 137 (1999), as the standard for the admissibility of expert testimony). 4 The Anderson defendants later filed a motion to strike additional opinions Dr. Taub offered, arguing that Dr. Taub offered new and previously undisclosed opinions in response to the Anderson defendants’ summary judgment motion. | 1 | 2026–2026 |
Kumho Tire Co. v. Carmichael
green
1 sentence2026Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993), as modified in Kumho Tire Co. v. Carmichael, 526 U.S. 137 (1999), as the standard for the admissibility of expert testimony). 4 The Anderson defendants later filed a motion to strike additional opinions Dr. Taub offered, arguing that Dr. Taub offered new and previously undisclosed opinions in response to the Anderson defendants’ summary judgment motion. | 1 | 2026–2026 |
Harris v. United States
green
2 sentences2023It “was not intended to serve as a rule to be followed in every case in which criminal contempt sanctions are imposed.” Armstrong, 781 F.2d at 705 (citing Harris v. United States, 382 U.S. 162 , 86 S. Ct. 352 , 15 L. 2023It “was not intended to serve as a rule to be followed in every case in which criminal contempt sanctions are imposed.” Armstrong, 781 F.2d at 705 (citing Harris v. United States, 382 U.S. 162 , 86 S. Ct. 352 , 15 L. | 1 | 2023–2023 |
cluster 780056
green
1 sentence2023Ed. 1117 (1947)); see also Armstrong v. Guccione, 470 F.3d 89 , 101 (2d Cir. 2006) (seven-year coercive confinement did not violate petitioner’s due process rights); United States v. Harris, 582 F.3d 512, 513 (3d Cir. 2009) (same with five- year coercive confinement); Chadwick v. Janecka, 312 F.3d 597 (3d Cir. 2002) (reversing habeas court’s order releasing a state petitioner from seven-year conditional confinement as there is no federal constitutional bar to petitioner’s “indefinite confinement for civil contempt so long as he retains the ability to comply with the order”). 5 In United States | 1 | 2023–2023 |
Anderson v. BH Acquisition, Inc.
green
2 sentences2017This Court declined to hold that a claim had been frivolous, though the plaintiff did not prevail 34 on appeal: “[a]lthough Anderson’s claim has proven to be unsuccessful, we cannot say that the claim was frivolous or that Anderson had no hope of success.” Anderson, 771 So. 2d at 922 . 2017This Court declined to hold that a claim had been frivolous, though the plaintiff did not prevail on appeal: “[although Anderson’s claim has proven to be unsuccessful, we cannot say that the claim was frivolous or that Anderson had no hope of success.” Anderson, 771 So.2d at 922 . | 1 | 2017–2017 |
Batson v. Kentucky
green
2 sentences2008We must give great deference to the trial court’s determinations under Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 , 106 S.Ct. 1712 , 90 L.Ed.2d 69 (1986), because such determinations are largely based on credibility. 2008We must give great deference to the trial court’s determinations under Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 , 106 S.Ct. 1712 , 90 L.Ed.2d 69 (1986), because such determinations are largely based on credibility. | 1 | 2008–2008 |
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.