178 N.C. App. 727 - In Re AK’s Empirical Analysis
2006
Citation profile
12 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 149 N.C. App. 756 - In Re Pittman · State Ex Rel. Tucker v. Frinzi · 114 N.C. App. 91 - Matter of Nicholson · 126 N.C. App. 764 - Matter of Van Kooten · 146 N.C. App. 302 - In Re Smith
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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Consequently, where the trial court did not accept any formal evidence in addition to its consideration of the prior court orders concerning C.A.K., and the only order concerning C.A.K. that contained findings by the clear and convincing standard of proof was from a hearing occurring many months earlier, the trial court could not, on this record, conclude that `the minor child would be at substantial risk of neglect if placed in the custody of the . . . parents at this time.'”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“A.K. was at `substantial risk of neglect' because of father's failure to acknowledge the cause of C.A.K.'s injuries.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“it appears that at least some of the physical injuries sustained by [C.A.K.] are a result of inappropriate force applied to the child's body by her caretaker(s) or while in their care.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. In Re As
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.