Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 20 N.C. App. 406 - Jackson v. Jackson

20 N.C. App. 406 - Jackson v. Jackson’s Empirical Analysis

1974

Citation profile

10
cited by 10 later decisions
2
states following
March 2011
most recently cited

10 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently March 2011

10 state decisions

4019741980199020002010decided

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 Marks & Co. v. Hastings · Rosenkrans v. Barker. · Noblett v. Bartsch · Priddy v. MacKenzie · Bowen v. W. A. Pollard & Co.

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

  1. “Advising the initiation of a criminal prosecution is clearly within the normal range of activities for a typical law partnership, but taking such action maliciously and without probable cause is quite a different matter. In this case the acting partner, Mr. Golding, was either conducting himself lawfully and ethically in his relationship with his client, in which event neither he nor any of his partners would have any liability, or he was conducting himself maliciously and unlawfully and would not be acting in the ordinary course of the partnership business.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “Where, by any wrongful act or omission of any partner acting in the ordinary course of the business of the partner ship or with the authority of his co-partners, loss or injury is caused to any person, not being a partner in the partnership, or any penalty is incurred, the partnership is liable therefor to the same extent as the partner so acting or omitting to act.”
    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.