Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 270 N.C. 374 - Nunn v. Smith

Nunn v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis

1967

Citation profile

31
cited by 31 later decisions
2
states following
July 2017
most recently cited

6 federal appellate · 25 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 31 later decisions — most recently July 2017 · most notably Oestreicher v. American National Stores, Inc. (1976), Newton v. Standard Fire Insurance (1976)

6 federal appellate · 25 state decisions

140196719701980199020002010decided

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 Lutz Industries, Inc. v. Dixie Home Stores · Swinton v. Savoy Realty Co. · Arnold v. Ray Charles Enterprises, Inc. · Horne v. Cloninger · Powell v. Cross

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

  1. ““ ‘ . . . “ ‘Punitive damages’ are damages, other than compensatory or nominal damages, awarded against a person to punish him for his outrageous conduct.” . . . * * * “ ‘We are inclined to the view that the facts in evidence here are not sufficient to warrant the allowance of punitive damages. There was no evidence of insult, indignity, malice, oppression or bad motive other than the same false representations for which they have received the amount demanded.’ ””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “if known to be untrue, is a false pretense.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “with intent to cheat and defraud another.”
    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.