131 N.C. App. 231 - Inspirational Network, Inc. v. Combs’s Empirical Analysis
1998
Citation profile
73 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 82 later decisions — most recently January 2026 · most notably 138 N.C. App. 612 - Bruggeman v. Meditrust Acquisition Co. (2000), 169 N.C. App. 690 - Banc of America Securities LLC v. Evergreen International Aviation, Inc. (2005)
73 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 International Shoe Co. v. Washington · Burger King Corporation v. Rudzewicz · World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. v. Woodson · Kulko v. Superior Court of California in and for City and County of San Francisco · Dillon v. Numismatic Funding Corp.
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 82 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“46. Upon information and belief, Defendants Erde and/or Bleeker as officers, principal agents and primary shareholders of Energex and Plainview have failed to observe the proper corporate formalities as required by applicable corporate law. 47. Upon information and belief, Defendants Erde and/or Bleeker hold complete domination, not only of finances, but of policy and business practice, in Energex and Plainview. 48. Upon information and belief, Defendants Erde and/or Bleeker have used this control and domination of Energex and Plainview to conceal and/or divert assets away from Plainview to themselves and to Plainview’s alter-ego Energex, thereby leaving Plainview inadequately capitalized and causing Plainview to default on its obligations to SAFT. 49. Upon information and belief, Erde and/or Bleeker have fraudulently concealed and/or diverted Plainview’s assets that would otherwise have been or should have been available to pay outstanding amounts owed to SAFT. 50. Upon information and belief, Plainview’s failure to pay the outstanding amounts owed to SAFT was caused by the actions of Erde and/or Bleeker, in particular their diverting assets from Plainview for personal gain or to the benefit of Plainview’s alter-ego Energex. The actions of Erde and Bleeker were dishonest, unjust and in contravention of SAFT’s legal rights. 51. The actions taken by Erde and/or Bleeker amount to a use of Plainview and/or Energex as shields for activities in express violation of applicable corp”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“Plaintiffs’] unchallenged showing include[s] the following: (1) [Defendants] solicited [Plaintiffs] to [perform services] in North Carolina; (2) [Plaintiffs’] performed the contracted services on behalf of [the Defendants] in North Carolina; (3) [Defendants] forwarded certain payment to North Carolina for [Plaintiffs’] services, but defaulted on the full contractual amount; and (4) [Plaintiffs] [were] injured by [Defendants’] default. Plaintiffs] thus prima facie satisfied the requirements of G.S. § l-75.4(4)(a) for personal jurisdiction over [Defendants].”
1 later decision quote this exact passage““Where unverified allegations in the complaint meet plaintiff’s initial burden of proving the existence of jurisdiction ... and [the] defendant [does] not contradict plaintiff’s allegations in their sworn affidavit, such allegations are accepted as true and deemed controlling” .... However, where, as in this case, defendants submit some form of evidence to counter plaintiffs’ allegations, those allegations can no longer be taken as true or controlling and plaintiffs cannot rest on the allegations of the complaint.”
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.