Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 340 N.C. 699 - Camalier v. Jeffries

Camalier v. Jeffries’s Empirical Analysis

1995

Citation profile

66
cited by 66 later decisions
1
states following
August 2019
most recently cited

6 federal appellate · 2 district · 44 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 66 later decisions — most recently August 2019 · most notably 158 N.C. App. 208 - Draughon v. Harnett County Board of Education (2003), McNair v. Lend Lease Trucks, Inc. (1996)

6 federal appellate · 2 district · 44 state decisions

300199520002010decided

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 Ohio Bureau of Employment Services v. Hodory · Local 408, International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. National Labor Relations Board · 5 Cal. 3d 153 - Vesely v. Sager · 16 Cal. 3d 313 - Bernhard v. Harrah's Club · Page v. Sloan

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

  1. “It is well established that in order to prevail in a negligence action, plaintiffs must offer evidence of the essential elements of negligence: duty, breach of duty, proximate cause, and damages.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “[A] defendant, as the moving party, may meet its burden on summary judgment by proving that an essential element of the opposing party's claim is nonexistent, or by showing through discovery that the opposing party cannot produce evidence to support an essential element of his claim.”
    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.