Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 187 N.C. App. 785 - Meadows v. Iredell County

187 N.C. App. 785 - Meadows v. Iredell County’s Empirical Analysis

2007

Citation profile

17
cited by 17 later decisions
1
states following
March 2019
most recently cited

17 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife · Sutton v. Duke · 85 N.C. App. 669 - Harris v. NCNB National Bank of North Carolina · Stanback v. Stanback · 155 N.C. App. 110 - Neuse River Foundation, Inc. v. Smithfield Foods, Inc.

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

  1. “In Neuse River, this Court defined “[t]he ‘irreducible constitutional minimum’ of standing” as: (1) “injury in fact” — an invasion of a legally protectéd interest that is (a) concrete and particularized and (b) actual or imminent, not conjectural or hypothetical; (2) the injury is fairly traceable to the challenged action of the defendant; and (3) it is likely, as opposed to merely speculative, that the injury will be redressed by a favorable decision.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “Although North Carolina courts are not bound by the 'case or controversy' requirement of the United States Constitution with respect to the jurisdiction of federal courts, similar 'standing' requirements apply 'to refer generally to a party's right to have a court decide the merits of a dispute.'”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “One such bar to recovery is a lack of standing, which may be challenged by a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.”
    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.