38 N.C. App. 159 - Russo v. Mountain High, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
1978
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 13 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 18 later decisions — most recently September 1993
3 federal appellate · 13 state decisions
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 Ragsdale v. Kennedy · Harding v. Southern Loan & Insurance · 32 N.C. App. 46 - Parker v. Bennett · Nytco Leasing, Inc. v. DAN-CLEVE CORPORATION · RGK, Inc. v. Guaranty Co.
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 18 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““While our courts have been hesitant to formulate an all-embracing definition of fraud, the Supreme Court has stated the following elements of actionable fraud in Ragsdale v. Kennedy, 286 N.C. 130, 138 , 209 S.E. 2d 494, 500 (1974): ‘(1) False representation or concealment of a material fact, (2) reasonably calculated to deceive, (3) made with intent to deceive, (4) which does in fact deceive, (5) resulting in damage to the injured party.’ ””
1 later decision quote this exact passage“(1) material misrepresentation of a past or existing fact; (2) the representation must be definite and specific; (3) made with knowledge of its falsity or in culpo ble ignorance of its truth; (4) that the misrepresentation was made with intention that it should be acted upon; (5) that the recipient of the misrepresentation reasonably relied upon it and acted upon it; and (6) that there resulted in damage to the injured party.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage““Clearly, if the defendant moving for summary judgment in a fraud case presents material which effectively negates even one of the essential elements of fraud, summary judgment in defendant’s favor should be allowed. It is not necessary that defendant’s material negate all of the essential elements”
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.