defining instruction (West Virginia) · Go Syfert
← West Virginia issues

defining instruction in West Virginia

6 West Virginia opinions name it 2 courts 2004–2023 2 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by West Virginia 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 West Virginia.

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

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

Also cited on this issue (2)

CaseCitedYears
State v. Bartlett green
wva · 1987
2 sentences

2007Under our law, “[a] term which is widely used and which is readily comprehensible to the average person without further definition or refinement need not have a defining instruction.” Syllabus Point 2, State v. Bartlett, 177 W.Va. 663 , 355 S.E.2d 913 (1987).

2007Under our law, “[a] term which is widely used and which is readily comprehensible to the average person without further definition or refinement need not have a defining instruction.” Syllabus Point 2, State v. Bartlett, 177 W.Va. 663 , 355 S.E.2d 913 (1987).

62004–2023
Crockett v. Andrews green
wva · 1970
2 sentences

2004In syllabus point two of State v. Bartlett, 177 W.Va. 663 , 355 S.E.2d 913 (1987), this Court explained as follows: “A term which is widely used and which is readily comprehensible to the average person without further definition or refinement need not have a defining instruction.” In Crockett v. Andrews, 153 W.Va. 714 , 172 S.E.2d 384 (1970), this Court made the following observations regarding the issue of ambiguity: Ambiguity is a term connoting doubtfulness, doubleness of meaning or indistinctness or uncertainty of an expression used in a written instrument.

2004In syllabus point two of State v. Bartlett, 177 W.Va. 663 , 355 S.E.2d 913 (1987), this Court explained as follows: “A term which is widely used and which is readily comprehensible to the average person without further definition or refinement need not have a defining instruction.” In Crockett v. Andrews, 153 W.Va. 714 , 172 S.E.2d 384 (1970), this Court made the following observations regarding the issue of ambiguity: Ambiguity is a term connoting doubtfulness, doubleness of meaning or indistinctness or uncertainty of an expression used in a written instrument.

12004–2004

Where else courts name it

KS 19 (1976–2026) TX 8 (1936–2019) WV 6 (2004–2023) IL 4 (1893–1978) WA 3 (1988–2010) UT 3 (1991–2019) OH 3 (2000–2010) OR 2 (1956–1956) IA 2 (2015–2019) AK 2 (1976–1976) CA 2 (1993–2016) NY 2 (1992–1995) WY 2 (1989–2018)

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