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 Indiana opinions name it 2 courts 1976–2003 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Indiana 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 |
|---|---|---|
| No positive-treatment citations attached to this issue in Indiana. | ||
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Indiana. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Leavell v. State
green
2 sentences2003The defendant argued that "the relationship between him and his former attor ney precluded the attorney from testifying as to his identity, inasmuch as their relationship was protected by the Attorney/Client privilege." Id. 2003The defendant argued that "the relationship between him and his former attorney *913 precluded the attorney from testifying as to his identity, inasmuch as their relationship was protected by the Attorney/Client privilege." Id. | 1 | 2003–2003 |
Cuyler v. Sullivan
green
1 sentence1996Id. [4] The only testimony from Beal in the record is during the hearing on the defendant's Belated Motion to Correct Errors and at no time during that testimony did Beal mention having been a client of the defense counsel. [5] We note that the defendant offers additional evidence as to what the witnesses would have said had they been called at trial. | 1 | 1996–1996 |
Helmbrecht v. St. Paul Insurance
green
2 sentences1991This is disingenuous at best, considering the court began its discussion of contributory negligence by stating "[f]irst, we recognize that contributory negligence of a client can be a defense in a legal malpractice action." Id., 122 Wis.2d at 121 , 362 N.W.2d at 132 . 1991This is disingenuous at best, considering the court began its discussion of contributory negligence by stating "[f]irst, we recognize that contributory negligence of a client can be a defense in a legal malpractice action." Id., 122 Wis.2d at 121 , 362 N.W.2d at 132 . | 1 | 1991–1991 |
Sanders v. Townsend
green
2 sentences1991This is disingenuous at best, considering the court began its discussion of contributory negligence by stating "[f]irst, we recognize that contributory negligence of a client can be a defense in a legal malpractice action." Id., 122 Wis.2d at 121 , 362 N.W.2d at 132 . [1] The plaintiff's evidence discloses that Evans owns several parcels of land in Dearborn County. 1991This is disingenuous at best, considering the court began its discussion of contributory negligence by stating "[f]irst, we recognize that contributory negligence of a client can be a defense in a legal malpractice action." Id., 122 Wis.2d at 121 , 362 N.W.2d at 132 . | 1 | 1991–1991 |
Washington v. State
green
1 sentence1983Defendant admits that this issue was recently decided by this Court in Washington v. State, (1982) Ind., 441 N.E.2d 1355 , in which we approved the giving of such testimony by prior counsel, so long as the testimony does not reveal confidential communications or secrets of the former client. | 1 | 1983–1983 |
Kunin v. Forman Realty Corp.
green
1 sentence1978The state court in Kunin, supra, construes the statute as granting the client the privilege. | 1 | 1978–1978 |
Key v. State
green
2 sentences1976Key v. State, (1955) 235 Ind. 172 , 132 N.E.2d 143 ; Fluty v. State, (1947) 224 Ind. 652 , 71 N.E.2d 565 ; Oliver v. Pate, (1873) 43 Ind. 132 . 1976Key v. State, (1955) 235 Ind. 172 , 132 N.E.2d 143 ; Fluty v. State, (1947) 224 Ind. 652 , 71 N.E.2d 565 ; Oliver v. Pate, (1873) 43 Ind. 132 . | 1 | 1976–1976 |
Fluty v. State
green
2 sentences1976Key v. State, (1955) 235 Ind. 172 , 132 N.E.2d 143 ; Fluty v. State, (1947) 224 Ind. 652 , 71 N.E.2d 565 ; Oliver v. Pate, (1873) 43 Ind. 132 . 1976Key v. State, (1955) 235 Ind. 172 , 132 N.E.2d 143 ; Fluty v. State, (1947) 224 Ind. 652 , 71 N.E.2d 565 ; Oliver v. Pate, (1873) 43 Ind. 132 . | 1 | 1976–1976 |
Oliver v. Pate
green
1 sentence1976Key v. State, (1955) 235 Ind. 172 , 132 N.E.2d 143 ; Fluty v. State, (1947) 224 Ind. 652 , 71 N.E.2d 565 ; Oliver v. Pate, (1873) 43 Ind. 132 . | 1 | 1976–1976 |
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.