Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 147 N.C. App. 771 - Pratt v. Staton

147 N.C. App. 771 - Pratt v. Staton’s Empirical Analysis

2001

Citation profile

29
cited by 29 later decisions
1
states following
May 2018
most recently cited

29 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on 115 N.C. App. 377 - Jeffreys v. Raleigh Oaks Joint Venture · Bailey v. Gooding · Sink v. Easter · 132 N.C. App. 341 - Hudson-Cole Development Corp. v. Beemer · 40 N.C. App. 227 - O'Neill v. Southern National Bank

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

  1. “[o]n motion and upon such terms as are just, the [trial] court may relieve a party . . . from a final judgment, order, or proceeding for the following reasons: (5) The judgment has been satisfied, released, or discharged, or a prior judgment upon which it is based has been reversed or otherwise vacated, or it is no longer equitable that the judgment should have prospective application; or (6) Any other reason justifying relief from the operation of the judgment.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “An order . . . granting a motion to dismiss certain claims in an action, while leaving other claims in the action to go forward, is plainly an interlocutory order.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “by adding the trial court’s Rule 54(b) certification and establishing grounds for immediate appellate review of an otherwise interlocutory order, the trial court’s 10 October 2000 amended order, likewise “altered the substantive rights of the parties.” . . . [T]he amended order in the instant case allowed plaintiffs to circumvent the established procedural rules governing the bringing of an appeal and secure appellate review of an otherwise unappealable order. Accordingly, we hold that [N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1A-1,] Rule 60(a) is not an appropriate means for seeking an amendment to an order or judgment to add the trial court’s . . . certification [pursuant to Rule 54(b)],”
    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.