Gambrell v. Zengel

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• “The possibility of some inflammatory effect on the jury as compared with the relevancy of the evidence and its generally accepted admissi bility is best left to the discretion of the trial court. We find no abuse of discretion.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

8 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Brenman v. Demello
  Supreme Court of New Jersey· 2007-05-30· cited 97×
• Lamendola v. MIZELL
  New Jersey Superior Court App Division· 1971-07-02· cited 23×
• Burd v. Vercruyssen
  New Jersey Superior Court App Division· 1976-06-10· cited 19×
• Mason v. Lynch
  Court of Appeals of Maryland· 2005-07-15· cited 15×
• Mason v. Lynch
  Court of Special Appeals of Maryland· 2003-05-06· cited 10×
• Baltus v. Von Der Lippe
  Supreme Court of Minnesota· 1972-04-14· cited 3×
• Brenman v. Demello
  New Jersey Superior Court App Division· 2006-03-08· cited 3×
• RISH VS. SIMAO C/W 59208/59423
  Nevada Supreme Court· 2016-03-17

Cites

7 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Murray v. Mossman
  Washington Supreme Court· 1958-09-25· cited 42×
• Johnson v. McRee
  California Court of Appeal· 1944-10-25· cited 22×
• Martin v. Miqueu
  California Court of Appeal· 1940-02-02· cited 14×
• Phillips v. Lawrence
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1967-09-06· cited 12×
• Patras Ex Rel. Patras v. Waldbaum
  Nebraska Supreme Court· 1960-03-11· cited 9×
• Hayes v. Sutton
  District of Columbia Court of Appeals· 1963-05-03· cited 8×
• Gulf Oil Corporation v. Slattery
  Supreme Court of Delaware· 1961-06-29· cited 7×