Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 348 N.C. 130 - Bailey v. State

Bailey v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1998

Citation profile

122
cited by 122 later decisions
6
states following
March 2019
most recently cited

117 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 122 later decisions — most recently March 2019 · most notably 134 N.C. App. 217 - Shell Island Homeowners Ass'n v. Tomlinson (1999), Westminster Homes, Inc. v. Town of Cary Zoning Board of Adjustment (2001)

117 state decisions

750199820002010decided

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

Applies 4 U.S.C. § 111

Relies on Alyeska Pipeline Service Company v. Wilderness Society · United States Trust Company of New York v. New Jersey · Lynch v. United States · Davis v. Michigan Department of the Treasury · Allied Structural Steel Company v. Spannaus

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

  1. “"According to the cardinal principle of justice and fair dealings between government and man, as well as between man and man, the parties shall know prior to entering into a business relationship the conditions which shall govern that relationship."”
    13 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “... `a litigant or a lawyer who recovers a common fund for the benefit of persons other than himself or his client is entitled to a reasonable attorney's fee from the fund as a whole.'”
    7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “the purpose underlying the requirements of section 105-267 is to •put the State on notice that a tax, or a particular application thereof, is being challenged as improper so that the State might properly budget or plan for the potential that certain revenues derived from such tax have to be refunded.While claims of improper or illegal taxation . . . are subject to the procedural requirements of section 105-267, this is only to the extent necessary to provide the State with the notice sufficient to protect fiscal stability.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.