246 N.C. App. 419 - Freedman v. Payne’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

3 state decisions

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

1. “Here, treating the allegations in appellant's complaint as true as we must at this stage, defendants are at fault for striking a "side-deal" with the prosecutor regarding prison time and federal farm subsidies, and for instructing appellant that he must not disclose the side-deal to the court. Appellant is at fault for lying under oath in federal court by affirming that he was not pleading guilty based on promises not contained in the plea agreement.... Although appellant claims that his complaint does not establish his intentional wrongdoing, we agree with defendants that appellant's complaint shows otherwise. Appellant's complaint reveals the following [allegations]: 34. Ramos returned and told [appellant] that AUSA Williams said the government was not interested in active time and that AUSA Williams had agreed to "stand silent" at sentencing and would not argue for an active sentence. ... 36. Ramos also told [appellant] that ... AUSA Williams told him that the government did not want to pursue debarment [from federal farm subsidies]. ... 38. Ramos then warned [appellant] that these promises from AUSA Williams were part of a side-deal with Williams-a wink-wink, nudge-nudge-and that [appellant] must not disclose this side-deal to the court, because this would upset Judge Flanagan and would cost [appellant] the chance to assure that he would not be incarcerated. ... 41. ... [F]aced with the opportunity to avoid incarceration and debarment, ... [appellant] agreed to plead guil”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 253 N.C. App. 282 - Freedman v. Payne

2. “The common law defense by which the defendants seek to shield themselves from liability in the present case arises from the maxim in pari delicto potior est conditio possidentis [defendentis ] meaning in a case of equal or mutual fault ... the condition of the party in possession [or defending] is the better one. The doctrine, well recognized in this State, prevents the courts from redistributing losses among wrongdoers. The law generally forbids redress to one for an injury done him by another, if he himself first be in the wrong about the same matter whereof he complains. No one is permitted to profit by his own fraud, or to take advantage of his own wrong, or to found a claim on his own iniquity, or to acquire any rights by his own crime.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 253 N.C. App. 282 - Freedman v. Payne

3. “"Dismissal under Rule 12(b)(6) is proper when one of the following three conditions is satisfied: (1) the complaint on its face reveals that no law supports the plaintiff's claim; (2) the complaint on its face reveals the absence of facts sufficient to make a good claim; or (3) the complaint discloses some fact that necessarily defeats the plaintiff's claim." "On appeal, we review the pleadings de novo to determine their legal sufficiency and to determine whether the trial court's ruling on the motion to dismiss was correct."”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 257 N.C. App. 237 - Wilson v. SunTrust Bank