Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 145 N.C. App. 434 - Smith Ex Rel. Smith v. Smith

145 N.C. App. 434 - Smith Ex Rel. Smith v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis

2001

Citation profile

57
cited by 57 later decisions
6
states following
December 2018
most recently cited

55 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Denbicare U.S.A., Inc. v. Toys "R" Us, Inc. · Singleton v. Christ the Servant Evangelical Lutheran Church · State v. Porter · In Re Hatley · 131 N.C. App. 231 - Inspirational Network, Inc. v. Combs

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 57 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “stigma that is likely to attach to a person judicially determined to have committed [domestic] abuse”
    8 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “[i]n addition to the collateral legal consequences, there are numerous non-legal collateral consequences to entry of a domestic violence protective order that render expired orders appeal-able. For example, a Maryland appellate court in addressing an appeal of an expired domestic violence protective order, noted that “a person applying for a job, a professional license, a government position, admission to an academic institution, or the like, may be asked about whether he or she has been the subject of a [domestic violence protective order].” Piper v. Layman, 726 A.2d 887, 891 (Md. Ct. Spec. App. 1999). The Piper court, therefore, held appeals from expired domestic violence protective orders are not moot because of the “stigma that is likely to attach to a person judicially determined to have committed [domestic] abuse.” Id.”
    7 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “(1) Attempting to cause bodily injury, or intentionally causing bodily injury; (2) Placing the aggrieved party or a member of the aggrieved party's family or household in fear of imminent serious bodily injury or continued harassment, as defined in G.S. 14-277.3, that rises to such a level as to inflict substantial emotional distress; or (3) Committing any act defined in G.S. 14-27.2 through G.S. 14-27.7.”
    5 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.