Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 118 N.C. App. 178 - James v. Clark

118 N.C. App. 178 - James v. Clark’s Empirical Analysis

1995

Citation profile

89
cited by 89 later decisions
1
states following
April 2019
most recently cited

83 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 89 later decisions — most recently April 2019 · most notably 200 N.C. App. 162 - Carcano v. JBSS, LLC (2009), 158 N.C. App. 208 - Draughon v. Harnett County Board of Education (2003)

83 state decisions

430199520002010decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Relies on 24 N.C. App. 204 - Whitley v. Cubberly · Wilson v. McLeod Oil Co., Inc. · 75 N.C. App. 1 - Watts v. Cumberland County Hospital System, Inc. · Watts v. Cumberland County Hospital System, Inc. · Wilson v. McLEOD OIL COMPANY, INC.

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 89 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “(1) proving that an essential element of the plaintiff's case is non-existent, or (2) showing through discovery that the plaintiff cannot produce evidence to support an essential element of his or her claim, or (3) showing that the plaintiff cannot surmount an affirmative defense.”
    16 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “An appeal from an order granting summary judgment raises only the issues of whether, on the face of the record, there is any genuine issue of material fact, and whether the prevailing party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “(c) Except where otherwise provided by statute, a cause of action for malpractice arising out of the performance of or failure to perform professional services shall be deemed to accrue at the time of the occurrence of the last act of the defendant giving rise to the cause of action: Provided that whenever there is bodily injury to the person, economic or monetary loss, or a defect in or damage to property which originates under circumstances making the injury, loss, defect or damage not readily apparent to the claimant at the time of its origin, and the injury, loss, defect or damage is discovered or should reasonably be discovered by the claimant two or more years after the occurrence of the last act of the defendant giving rise to the cause of action, suit must be commenced within one year from the date discovery is made: Provided nothing herein shall be construed to reduce the statute of limitation in any such case below three years. Provided further, that in no event shall an action be commenced more than four years from the last act of the defendant giving rise to the cause of action....”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.