leading case doctrine (New York) · Go Syfert
← New York issues

leading case doctrine in New York

6 New York opinions name it 3 courts 1899–2011 0 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.

Followed or applied (0)

CaseFollowedCited
No positive-treatment citations attached to this issue in New York.

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in New York. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (7)

CaseCitedYears
Merritt v. . Bartholick green
ny · 1867
1 sentence

2011The leading case for the rule that in a secured transaction the obligation is the principal thing and the security only an incident thereto is Merritt v Bartholick ( 36 NY 44 [1867]). 3 In that case, the Court of Appeals, in reviewing a referee’s decision, was faced with the issue of whether the delivery of a mortgage was intended to operate as a valid assignment of the mortgage.

12011–2011
Reich v. Bankers Life & Casualty Co. green
ny · 1986
1 sentence

2001The leading case on the requirement of evidentiary facts is People v Dumas ( 68 NY2d 729 [1986]), where the Court of Ap peals reinstated orders of the criminal court that dismissed two misdemeanor complaints charging the defendants with criminal sale of marijuana in the fourth degree.

12001–2001
Mercado v. City of New York neutral
nyappdiv · 1966
1 sentence

1976On the other hand, it stated that where there is no evidence of a compromise verdict, nor improper prejudice to the defendant as a result of sympathy for the plaintiff, and "[w]here the questions of negligence and freedom from contributory negligence have been fully and fairly tried and properly submitted to the jury” without error in the record, "then, the verdict, if supported by the evidence, may properly be accepted as conclusively settling the same” (Mercado v City of New York, 25 AD2d 75, 77 ).

11976–1976
Dellwo v. Pearson green
minn · 1961
1 sentence

1970Comment c) and in Dellwo v. Pearson ( 259 Minn. 452 ) a leading case applying the exception.

11970–1970
Thomas v. . Winchester green
ny · 1852
1 sentence

1909At the outset, this is a close case on the question, were the “ Kascara Kathartics ” a harmful drug within the doctrine of the leading case of Thomas v. Winchester, 6 N. Y. 397 .

11909–1909
Jones v. Union Railway Co. green
nyappdiv · 1897
2 sentences

1899John, 57 N. Y. 567 ); and this court has recently held that the relation between the parties has no bearing on the applicability of the rule (Jones v. Railway Co., 18 App. Div. 267 , 46 N. Y.

1899John, 57 N. Y. 567 ); and this court has recently held that the relation between the parties has no bearing on the applicability of the rule (Jones v. Railway Co., 18 App. Div. 267 , 46 N. Y.

11899–1899
Mullen v. . St. John green
ny · 1874
1 sentence

1899John, 57 N. Y. 567 ); and this court has recently held that the relation between the parties has no bearing on the applicability of the rule (Jones v. Railway Co., 18 App. Div. 267 , 46 N. Y.

11899–1899

Where else courts name it

CA 14 (1948–2014) PA 10 (1944–2017) IL 6 (1955–1994) NY 6 (1899–2011) CT 5 (1955–2001) WI 4 (1981–1997) AR 3 (1903–2010) TX 3 (1985–2025) NM 3 (1954–1993) MD 3 (1986–2016) IA 3 (1952–1996) GA 2 (1946–1983) DE 2 (1893–2004) OR 2 (1926–1962) MO 2 (1885–1977) AL 2 (1958–1984) CO 2 (1960–2009) MT 2 (1921–1963) KS 2 (1991–2018)

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