Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 21 N.C. App. 365 - State v. Lash

21 N.C. App. 365 - State v. Lash’s Empirical Analysis

1974

Citation profile

6
cited by 6 later decisions
1
states following
June 2008
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 4 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently June 2008

2 federal appellate · 4 state decisions

201974198019902000decided

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 State v. Muse · State v. . Murphy

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

  1. ““There was no error in permitting employees of the Belk’s and Laurie’s stores to testify that when a garment is sold in their stores a part of the tag is removed for the purpose of inventory control to record the sale of the particular garment by color, size, style and manufacturer, and to testify that the tags on the garments found in defendant’s car were intact, which indicated the garments had not been sold. These were facts within the knowledge of the witnesses, and their testimony did not invade the province of the jury, which still had the task of determining whether the garments had been stolen.” 21 N.C. App. at 368 , 204 S.E. 2d at 566 . This assignment of error is overruled.”
    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.