6 New York opinions name it 3 courts 1905–2022 1 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by New York 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 |
|---|---|---|
Ashland Management Inc. v. Janiengreen1 sentence2010Were we to review it, we would find that the charge as a whole properly instructed the jury that damages for lost future profits must “be capable of measurement based upon known reliable factors without undue speculation” (Ashland Mgt. v Janien, 82 NY2d 395, 403 [1993]). | 1 | 1 |
People v. Leongreen1 sentence2008The defendant urges the court to apply the standard of trial jury instruction cited in People v Leon ( 121 AD2d 1, 6 [1st Dept 1986], lv denied 69 NY2d 830 [1987]) where the Court held that harmful error resulted because a jury was not instructed on accomplice testimony. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in New York. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
People v. Swamp
green
1 sentence2022Although, at no point during Officer Bragg's testimony before the grand jury or anyone else's testimony for that matter, did anyone offer any competent evidence that co-defendant Pena-Camilo removed anything from the car or indeed that he was even in the car at any point (see, People v Swamp, 84 NY2d 725 (1995]), video evidence was admitted that showed Netaly Pena-Camilo was the sole possessor of the guns and the video serves to demonstrate by clear-cut evidence that co-defendant Pena-Camilo was exclusively in possession of the bag of guns that was taken by him from the trunk and carried by hi | 1 | 2022–2022 |
Brady v. Maryland
green
1 sentence1984In effect, under Brady (supra), a harmful error analysis is subsumed with the notion of materiality, whereas under Rosario (supra), as already seen, such an analysis plays no part. | 1 | 1984–1984 |
People v. Rosario
green
1 sentence1984In effect, under Brady (supra), a harmful error analysis is subsumed with the notion of materiality, whereas under Rosario (supra), as already seen, such an analysis plays no part. | 1 | 1984–1984 |
Los Angeles v. Los Angeles City Water Co.
green
1 sentence1929(Los Angeles v. Los Angeles City Water Co., 177 U. S. 558, 579 .) In times of peace and harmony constitutional rights are not asserted. | 1 | 1929–1929 |
Lipp v. . Otis Brothers Co.
neutral
1 sentence1905It clearly had a tendency to awaken their sympathies, and thus influence their judgment in the direction of a greater award, and so within the well-settled rule enunciated in Lipp v. Otis Brothers & Co. ( 161 N. Y. 559 ) it must be deemed a harmful error, (See, also, Smith v. Lehigh Valley R. | 1 | 1905–1905 |
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.