Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 237 N.C. 619 - Ellison v. Hunsinger

Ellison v. Hunsinger’s Empirical Analysis

1953

Citation profile

50
cited by 50 later decisions
3
states following
January 2026
most recently cited

3 federal appellate · 45 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 50 later decisions — most recently January 2026 · most notably Boudreau v. Baughman (1988), Hawkins v. M & J FINANCE CORP. (1953)

3 federal appellate · 45 state decisions

15019531960197019801990200020102020decided

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 Dows v. National Exchange Bank · Northern Pac Co v. Babcock · Cox v. . Kinston · Price v. . Goodman · Handley Motor Co. v. Wood

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

  1. ““G.S. Ch. 106, Art. 38, makes * * * provision for the payment of full compensation to the plaintiff for-his cotton by making (1) the bond of Noggle, local Manager of the Warehouse, Inc., and his employer, the Warehouse,- Inc., primarily responsible for the plaintiff’s loss, if there has been any default of Noggles and the Warehouse, Iric., in the faithful performance of their obligations in operating a warehouse under the terms of G.S. 106, Art. 38; and if they are not responsible by making (2) the bond of Fairley, State Warehouse Superintendent, liable for plaintiff’s loss, if there has been any default by him in the faithful performance of his duties as State Warehouse Superintendent; and (3) if the plaintiff’s loss, or any part of it, is not covered by such bonds, and by the liability of the Warehouse, Inc., then the indemnifying or guaranty fund created by G.S. 106-435 and held in the State Treasury to the credit of the warehouse system is responsible to the plaintiff for his loss, or any part of his loss not covered by such bonds.””
    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.