approval instruction (Indiana) · Go Syfert
← Indiana issues

approval instruction in Indiana

5 Indiana opinions name it 2 courts 1895–1997 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.

Followed or applied (0)

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

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

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

Also cited on this issue (6)

CaseCitedYears
Peavler v. BD. OF COM'RS MONROE CTY. green
ind · 1988
1 sentence

1997The committee reviews the proposed standard and considers “all of the social, economic, political, and public policy concerns *196 which may be caused by the approval of the standard.” Id.

11997–1997
Warren v. State green
ind · 1963
2 sentences

1969In other words, if the will of such person is simply overbourne by ungoverned passion or temper and is not the result of a diseased mind then criminal responsibility results from his criminal act.” The above instruction purportedly was given pursuant to the approval of the instruction given in Warren v. State (1963), 243 Ind. 508, 515 , 188 N. E. 2d 108 .

1969In other words, if the will of such person is simply overbourne by ungoverned passion or temper and is not the result of a diseased mind then criminal responsibility results from his criminal act.” The above instruction purportedly was given pursuant to the approval of the instruction given in Warren v. State (1963), 243 Ind. 508, 515 , 188 N. E. 2d 108 .

11969–1969
Bain, Admx. v. Mattmiller green
ind · 1938
2 sentences

1961Support for appellee’s position here is based upon the approval of an instruction in Bain, Admx. v. Mattmiller (1938), 213 Ind. 549, 556 , 13 N. E. 2d 712, 715 , as follows: “ ‘If Charles Bain, plaintiff’s decedent herein was guilty of any negligence, no matter how slight, which proximately contributed to the injury and death referred to in plaintiff’s complaint, your verdict must be for the defendant.’ ” (Our italics.) In sustaining such instruction this court, at page 556 of 213 Ind., said: “As we read this instruction it is in harmony with the law as stated in cases cited. 1 If the plaintif

1961Support for appellee’s position here is based upon the approval of an instruction in Bain, Admx. v. Mattmiller (1938), 213 Ind. 549, 556 , 13 N. E. 2d 712, 715 , as follows: “ ‘If Charles Bain, plaintiff’s decedent herein was guilty of any negligence, no matter how slight, which proximately contributed to the injury and death referred to in plaintiff’s complaint, your verdict must be for the defendant.’ ” (Our italics.) In sustaining such instruction this court, at page 556 of 213 Ind., said: “As we read this instruction it is in harmony with the law as stated in cases cited. 1 If the plaintif

11961–1961
Livingston v. Rice green
indctapp · 1933
2 sentences

1961Livingston v. Rice (1933), 96 Ind. App. 176 , 184 N. E. 583 , is the other authority cited for the same instruction.

1961Livingston v. Rice (1933), 96 Ind. App. 176 , 184 N. E. 583 , is the other authority cited for the same instruction.

11961–1961
Cook v. State ex rel. Patterson green
ind · 1859
1 sentence

1911The opinion in the case of Cook v. State, ex rel. (1859), 13 Ind. 154 , relied on by counsel, approved an instruction charging the jury that “if Cook [the treasurer], at the expiration of his first term, was a defaulter, and, being his own successor, used funds that came to his hands during his second term, to pay the balance against him at the end of his first term, the securities in the first bond are discharged, and the sureties in the second bond are liable for the money thus appropriated.” But the approval of the instruction is put upon the ground that the condition of the bond was that t

11911–1911
Reed v. Reed neutral
indctapp · 1893
1 sentence

1895In such a case we would reiterate with the strongest approval the doctrine declared by Reinhard, J., in Reed v. Reed, 6 Ind. App. 317 .

11895–1895

Where else courts name it

CA 39 (1923–2023) TX 21 (1874–2015) OR 13 (1923–2026) NY 13 (1921–2016) CT 13 (1896–2010) IL 9 (1972–2019) AL 9 (1909–2026) PA 8 (1985–2023) FL 8 (1921–2023) NJ 7 (1846–1995) WA 7 (1904–2010) IA 6 (1956–2023) MO 6 (1883–2018) AZ 6 (1942–2016) IN 5 (1895–1997) MA 5 (1944–2017) KS 5 (1902–2002) DC 5 (1963–2009) DE 4 (2010–2023) WI 4 (1969–2021) NC 4 (1922–2011) OH 4 (1987–2014) VA 3 (1924–1958) NE 3 (1905–1994) VT 3 (1923–2016) MD 3 (1987–2022) AR 3 (1934–2001) GA 3 (1939–1996) SC 3 (1934–2023) MI 2 (1992–2006) WY 2 (1987–2017) LA 2 (1927–1980) ID 2 (2001–2023) MT 2 (1912–1926) TN 2 (1943–2016) KY 2 (1926–1991) NM 2 (2011–2012) SD 2 (1931–1946)

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