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 Tennessee opinions name it 2 courts 1948–2019 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.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Branch v. Warrengreen2 sentences2019See Crowder v. Laing, No. 03A01-9801-CH-00013, 1998 WL 783320 , at *3 (Tenn. Ct. App. Nov. 9, 1998) (citing Branch v. Warren, 527 S.W.2d 89, 91-92 (Tenn. 1975)) (noting that “[t]he Supreme Court has emphasized the liberality of this rule”). 1987C.P., at the time the defendants sought to amend their answers they could do so “only by written consent of the adverse party or by leave of court.” The rule further provides that such “leave shall be freely given when justice so requires.” In Branch v. Warren, 527 S.W.2d 89 (Tenn.1975), this Court emphasized the liberality of this rule where pre-trial amendments are sought and noted that Rule 15.01 substantially lessened the exercise of pretrial discretion on the part of the trial judge. | 4 | 5 |
Gardiner v. Wordgreen2 sentences2019This rule “applies equally to plaintiffs and defendants who seek to amend their pleadings.” Pratcher, [v. Methodist Healthcare Memphis Hosps.,] 407 S.W.3d [727,] 741 [(Tenn. 2013).] The Tennessee Supreme Court has “emphasized the liberality of this rule where pre-trial amendments are sought.” Gardiner v. Word, 731 S.W.2d 889, 891 (Tenn. 1987). 2016The Tennessee Supreme Court has “emphasized the liberality of this rule where pretrial amendments are sought.” Gardiner v. Word, 731 S.W.2d 889, 891 (Tenn. 1987). | 2 | 2 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Tennessee. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Pryor v. Richardson
green
2 sentences1948Judge McKinney, speaking for the Court, discussed at length the cases showing our departure from the old rules of the common law, but in disposing* of the case, in spite of the doctrine of liberality, he voided the hdbendmn and approved the fee simple created by the granting clause, holding that there the Grantor having conveyed all his “ ‘right, title, claim and interest’ . . . there was nothing left in the grantor,” ( 162 Tenn. at page 349 , 37 S. W. (2d) at page 114 ) and the Grantee of the granting clause took a few simple absolute. 1948Judge McKinney, speaking for the Court, discussed at length the cases showing our departure from the old rules of the common law, but in disposing* of the case, in spite of the doctrine of liberality, he voided the hdbendmn and approved the fee simple created by the granting clause, holding that there the Grantor having conveyed all his “ ‘right, title, claim and interest’ . . . there was nothing left in the grantor,” ( 162 Tenn. at page 349 , 37 S. W. (2d) at page 114 ) and the Grantee of the granting clause took a few simple absolute. | 1 | 1948–1948 |
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.