Topic: the purpose of this contemporaneous objection requirement i… · Go Syfert
← All topics

Topic #8700

6 canonical passages across 4 cases, quoted by 42 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side — they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Jason N. Creamer v. Commonwealth of Virginia.

#Case FlagCanonical passage Citers
1 Jason N. Creamer v. Commonwealth of Virginia Anchor
vactapp · 2015
green “the purpose of this contemporaneous objection requirement is to allow the trial court a fair opportunity to resolve the issue at trial, thereby preventing unnecessary appeals and retrials.” 10
2 Jason N. Creamer v. Commonwealth of Virginia
vactapp · 2015
green “the purpose of the contemporaneous objection requirement in rule 5a:18 is to allow the trial court a fair opportunity to resolve the issue at trial, thereby preventing unnecessary appeals and retrials.” 9
3 Broadhead v. Broadhead
vactapp · 2008
green “employing the most deferential standard of appellate review, we reverse factual findings 'only if plainly wrong or not supported by credible evidence.” 7
4 Mary Ann Rowe v. Charles S. Rowe
vactapp · 2000
green “to allow a trial judge to disregard the holding of a previous panel would be an inefficient administration of justice, increasing the 'labor of appellate courts and the costs to litigation.” 6
5 Mary Ann Rowe v. Charles S. Rowe
vactapp · 2000
green “where there have been two appeals in the same case, between the same parties, and the facts are the same, nothing decided on the first appeal can be re-examined on a second appeal.” 5
6 Cortez-Hernandez v. Commonwealth
vactapp · 2011
green “to be timely, an objection must be made when the occasion arises-at the time the evidence is offered or the statement made.” 5

A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment — for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.

← Caselaw search · Hot / Trending / Newly red · Brief Check