expression requirement in Tennessee

7 Tennessee opinions name it 3 courts 1943–2018 0 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.

Followed or applied (3)

Case	Followed	Cited
King v. Danek Medical, Inc.green tennctapp · 2000 · cited in 2 Tennessee opinions naming this issue, 2000–2003 2 sentences 2003June 6, 2003); King v. Danek Med., Inc., 37 S.W.3d 429, 460 (Tenn.Ct.App.2000); Restatement (Second) of Torts § 286 cmt. d; Restatement (Second) of Torts § 874A cmt. e (“The common law tort of negligence is not changed, but the expression of the standard of care in certain fact situations is modified; it is changed from a general standard to a specific -rule of conduct.”). 2000Thomas & Assocs. v. Metropolitan Gov’t, No. M2001-00757-COA-R3-CV, 2003 WL 21302974 , at *7 (Tenn. Ct. App. June 6, 2003); King v. Danek Med., Inc., 37 S.W.3d 429, 460 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2000); Restatement (Second) of Torts § 286 cmt. d; Restatement (Second) of Torts § 874A cmt. e (“The common law tort of negligence is not changed, but the expression of the standard of care in certain fact situations is modified; it is changed from a general standard to a specific rule of conduct.”).	2	2
State v. Byrdgreen tenn · 1998 · cited in 1 Tennessee opinions naming this issue, 2018–2018 2 sentences 2018The defendant argues on appeal as he did in the trial court that this language is merely an expression of the rule previously stated by our supreme court that “[a]ggregation of separate thefts is generally permissible where separate larcenous acts are: (1) from the same owner[s]; (2) from the same location; and (3) pursuant to a continuing criminal impulse or a single sustained larcenous scheme,” see State v. Byrd, 968 S.W.2d 290, 291 (Tenn. 1998), or “when a defendant exercises simultaneous possession or control over stolen property belonging to different owners,” id. at 292 . 2018The defendant argues on appeal as he did in the trial court that this language is merely an expression of the rule previously stated by our supreme court that “[a]ggregation of separate thefts is generally permissible where separate larcenous acts are: (1) from the same owner[s]; (2) from the same location; and (3) pursuant to a continuing criminal impulse or a single sustained larcenous scheme,” see State v. Byrd, 968 S.W.2d 290, 291 (Tenn. 1998), or “when a defendant exercises simultaneous possession or control over stolen property belonging to different owners,” id. at 292 .	1	1
Brown ex rel. Brown v. Smithgreen tennctapp · 1980 · cited in 1 Tennessee opinions naming this issue, 2003–2003 1 sentence 2003Brown v. Smith, 604 S.W.2d 56, 59 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1980).	1	1

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

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

Also cited on this issue (7)

Case	Cited	Years
Young v. State green tenncrimapp · 1978 2 sentences 1985The court also commented that perhaps the best expression of this requirement found in our own cases is that by Judge Tatum in Young v. State, 566 S.W.2d 895 (Tenn.Cr.App.1978). 1980See: Wrather v. State, 179 Tenn. 666 , 169 S.W.2d 854 (1943); Caruthers v. State, 219 Tenn. 21 , 406 S.W.2d 159 (1966). [Perhaps the best expression of this requirement found in our own cases is that by Judge Tatum in Young v. State, Tenn.Cr.App., 566 S.W.2d 895 (1978).] The robbery of the White Front Cafe and the robbery of the Hendricks Grocery did have certain features in common, e. g., (1) both robberies were perpetrated by a team composed of three robbers, two men and one woman, (2) in both robberies the perpetrators closeted their victims in restrooms before leaving the premises, (3) the	2	1980–1985
Wrather v. State green tenn · 1943 2 sentences 1980See: Wrather v. State, 179 Tenn. 666 , 169 S.W.2d 854 (1943); Caruthers v. State, 219 Tenn. 21 , 406 S.W.2d 159 (1966). [Perhaps the best expression of this requirement found in our own cases is that by Judge Tatum in Young v. State, Tenn.Cr.App., 566 S.W.2d 895 (1978).] The robbery of the White Front Cafe and the robbery of the Hendricks Grocery did have certain features in common, e. g., (1) both robberies were perpetrated by a team composed of three robbers, two men and one woman, (2) in both robberies the perpetrators closeted their victims in restrooms before leaving the premises, (3) the 1980See: Wrather v. State, 179 Tenn. 666 , 169 S.W.2d 854 (1943); Caruthers v. State, 219 Tenn. 21 , 406 S.W.2d 159 (1966). [Perhaps the best expression of this requirement found in our own cases is that by Judge Tatum in Young v. State, Tenn.Cr.App., 566 S.W.2d 895 (1978).] The robbery of the White Front Cafe and the robbery of the Hendricks Grocery did have certain features in common, e. g., (1) both robberies were perpetrated by a team composed of three robbers, two men and one woman, (2) in both robberies the perpetrators closeted their victims in restrooms before leaving the premises, (3) the	2	1980–1985
People v. Haston green cal · 1968 2 sentences 1980Like similarities were shown to exist in People v. Cavanaugh, 69 Cal.2d 262 , 70 Cal. Rptr. 438 , 444 P.2d 110 (1968), cert. denied 395 U.S. 981 , 89 S.Ct. 2139 , 23 L.Ed.2d 768 , and People v. Haston, 69 Cal.App.2d 233 , 70 Cal.Rptr. 419 , 444 P.2d 91 (1968). 1980Like similarities were shown to exist in People v. Cavanaugh, 69 Cal.2d 262 , 70 Cal. Rptr. 438 , 444 P.2d 110 (1968), cert. denied 395 U.S. 981 , 89 S.Ct. 2139 , 23 L.Ed.2d 768 , and People v. Haston, 69 Cal.App.2d 233 , 70 Cal.Rptr. 419 , 444 P.2d 91 (1968).	1	1980–1980
Caruthers v. State green tenn · 1966 2 sentences 1980See: Wrather v. State, 179 Tenn. 666 , 169 S.W.2d 854 (1943); Caruthers v. State, 219 Tenn. 21 , 406 S.W.2d 159 (1966). [Perhaps the best expression of this requirement found in our own cases is that by Judge Tatum in Young v. State, Tenn.Cr.App., 566 S.W.2d 895 (1978).] The robbery of the White Front Cafe and the robbery of the Hendricks Grocery did have certain features in common, e. g., (1) both robberies were perpetrated by a team composed of three robbers, two men and one woman, (2) in both robberies the perpetrators closeted their victims in restrooms before leaving the premises, (3) the 1980See: Wrather v. State, 179 Tenn. 666 , 169 S.W.2d 854 (1943); Caruthers v. State, 219 Tenn. 21 , 406 S.W.2d 159 (1966). [Perhaps the best expression of this requirement found in our own cases is that by Judge Tatum in Young v. State, Tenn.Cr.App., 566 S.W.2d 895 (1978).] The robbery of the White Front Cafe and the robbery of the Hendricks Grocery did have certain features in common, e. g., (1) both robberies were perpetrated by a team composed of three robbers, two men and one woman, (2) in both robberies the perpetrators closeted their victims in restrooms before leaving the premises, (3) the	1	1980–1980
Stoppelman v. United States green scotus · 1969 1 sentence 1980Like similarities were shown to exist in People v. Cavanaugh, 69 Cal.2d 262 , 70 Cal. Rptr. 438 , 444 P.2d 110 (1968), cert. denied 395 U.S. 981 , 89 S.Ct. 2139 , 23 L.Ed.2d 768 , and People v. Haston, 69 Cal.App.2d 233 , 70 Cal.Rptr. 419 , 444 P.2d 91 (1968).	1	1980–1980
People v. Cavanaugh green cal · 1968 2 sentences 1980Like similarities were shown to exist in People v. Cavanaugh, 69 Cal.2d 262 , 70 Cal. Rptr. 438 , 444 P.2d 110 (1968), cert. denied 395 U.S. 981 , 89 S.Ct. 2139 , 23 L.Ed.2d 768 , and People v. Haston, 69 Cal.App.2d 233 , 70 Cal.Rptr. 419 , 444 P.2d 91 (1968). 1980Like similarities were shown to exist in People v. Cavanaugh, 69 Cal.2d 262 , 70 Cal. Rptr. 438 , 444 P.2d 110 (1968), cert. denied 395 U.S. 981 , 89 S.Ct. 2139 , 23 L.Ed.2d 768 , and People v. Haston, 69 Cal.App.2d 233 , 70 Cal.Rptr. 419 , 444 P.2d 91 (1968).	1	1980–1980
Lufkin v. Harvey green minn · 1915 2 sentences 1943We have found no better discussion of the doctrine of emancipation as applicable to the facts of the instant case than in the opinion in Lufkin v. Harvey et al., 131 Minn., 238 , 154 N. W., 1097 , L. 1943We have found no better discussion of the doctrine of emancipation as applicable to the facts of the instant case than in the opinion in Lufkin v. Harvey et al., 131 Minn., 238 , 154 N. W., 1097 , L.	1	1943–1943

Where else courts name it

CA 28 (1919–2010) IN 27 (1868–2020) PA 16 (1855–2019) TX 12 (1877–2019) WA 11 (1954–2005) MO 11 (1880–1979) NJ 10 (1950–2017) IL 8 (1905–2007) TN 7 (1943–2018) AL 7 (1889–2012) OR 7 (1888–1986) WI 7 (1900–2022) NY 7 (1896–2019) KY 6 (1913–1980) OK 6 (1908–2003) LA 6 (1933–2002) FL 6 (1934–2021) WV 6 (1926–2022) MS 5 (1902–2008) KS 4 (1935–1983) VA 4 (1928–1986) MN 4 (1944–2014) NM 4 (1980–2021) NC 3 (1942–1953) ID 3 (1956–2006) MT 3 (1998–2005) AZ 3 (1963–2007) MI 3 (1897–1990) OH 2 (2022–2023) HI 2 (1923–1950) ME 2 (1920–1931) RI 2 (1978–2000) IA 2 (1935–1976) CO 2 (1985–1996)

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