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.
6 Iowa opinions name it 2 courts 1985–2017 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Iowa 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 |
|---|---|---|
Cornell v. Stategreen2 sentences2017Cornell v. State, 529 N.W.2d 606, 610 (Iowa Ct. App. 1994). 2014See id. at 610 . | 3 | 3 |
State v. Smithgreen2 sentences2008State v. Smith, 240 N.W.2d 693, 695 (Iowa 1976). 2008State v. Smith, 240 N.W.2d 693, 695 (Iowa 1976). | 2 | 2 |
Farnum v. G.D. Searle & Co.green1 sentence1985See Farnum, 339 N.W.2d at 389 (A party seeking a protective order in response to his opponent’s request for discovery must make a particularized, factual case for protection of the information sought.); Robbins, 160 N.W.2d at 855 (When a party claims a privilege against discovery, the burden is on him to present facts establishing the privilege.). | 1 | 1 |
Robbins v. IOWA-ILLINOIS GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANYgreen1 sentence1985See Farnum, 339 N.W.2d at 389 (A party seeking a protective order in response to his opponent’s request for discovery must make a particularized, factual case for protection of the information sought.); Robbins, 160 N.W.2d at 855 (When a party claims a privilege against discovery, the burden is on him to present facts establishing the privilege.). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Iowa. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
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.