130 N.C. App. 47 - Watson v. Dixon’s Empirical Analysis
1998
Citation profile
18 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 30 later decisions — most recently March 2019 · most notably 152 N.C. App. 15 - Guthrie v. Conroy (2002), 149 N.C. App. 672 - Rhyne v. K-Mart Corp. (2002)
18 state decisions
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 Stanback v. Stanback · Dickens v. Puryear · 79 N.C. App. 483 - Hogan v. Forsyth Country Club Co. · North Carolina National Bank v. Burnette · HOGAH v. Forsyth Country Club Co.
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 30 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“This Court's review of a motion for a directed verdict is essentially the same as one for [JNOV]. Both motions test the sufficiency of the evidence presented at trial, the first after the plaintiff's case in chief, and the latter after the jury's decision. Additionally, both motions may be granted if the evidence so clearly establishes the fact in issue that no reasonable inferences to the contrary can be drawn and if the credibility of the movant's evidence is manifest as a matter of law. In assessing the propriety of both motions, we must take the plaintiff's evidence as true, and view all of the evidence in the light most favorable to him/her, giving him/her the benefit of every reasonable inference which may be legitimately drawn therefrom, with conflicts, contradictions, and inconsistencies being resolved in the plaintiff's favor.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“(1) extreme and outrageous conduct, (2) which is intended to cause and does cause (3) severe emotional distress to another. The tort may also exist where defendant's actions indicate a reckless indifference to the likelihood that they will cause severe emotional distress.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“A claim for [IIED] exists when a defendant's conduct exceeds all bounds usually tolerated by decent society and the conduct causes mental distress of a very serious kind.”
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.