119 N.C. App. 515 - Sinning v. Clark’s Empirical Analysis
1995
Citation profile
38 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 85 N.C. App. 669 - Harris v. NCNB National Bank of North Carolina · Braswell v. Braswell · 85 N.C. App. 338 - Dixon v. Stuart · Lutz Industries, Inc. v. Dixie Home Stores · 89 N.C. App. 188 - Coleman v. Cooper
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 38 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[fjirst, where there is a special relationship between the injured party and the [agency], and second, where the “[agency] . . . creates a special duty by promising protection to an individual, the protection is not forthcoming, and the individual’s reliance on the promise is causally related to the injury suffered.””
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“[a] showing that a municipality has undertaken to perform its duties to enforce [the building code] is not sufficient, by itself, to show the creation of a special relationship with particular individual citizens.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“the general proposition that a municipality and its agents ordinarily act for the benefit of the general public and not for a specific individual when exercising its statutory police powers, and, therefore, cannot be held liable for a failure to carry out its statutory duties to an individual.”
2 later decisions 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.