Lockhart v. List

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that whether object is moving or fixed is relevant but not dispositive of whether doctrine applies
• holding that in reviewing a jury instruction, this Court must review the entire instruction and look at all the evidence on the record to determine whether there was error and whether that error prejudiced the complaining party
• holding that in reviewing a jury instruction, this Court must review the entire instruction and look at all the evidence on the record to determine whether there was error and whether that error prejudiced the complaining party
• holding that where the evidence does not conclusively establish that the party seeking the defense of the sudden emergency doctrine created the sudden emergency, the jury should be instructed on both the assured clear distance rule and the sudden emergency doctrine
• sudden emergency charge should be given where reasonable minds could differ as to whether sudden emergency existed
• “It is important to recognize, however, that a person cannot avail himself of the protection of this doctrine if that person was himself driving carelessly or recklessly.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).