Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 41 N.C. App. 107 - Best v. Perry

41 N.C. App. 107 - Best v. Perry’s Empirical Analysis

1979

Citation profile

74
cited by 74 later decisions
2
states following
November 2018
most recently cited

74 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 74 later decisions — most recently November 2018 · most notably Dickens v. Puryear (1981), 79 N.C. App. 483 - Hogan v. Forsyth Country Club Co. (1986)

74 state decisions

48019791980199020002010decided

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 Kessing v. National Mortgage Corporation · Koontz v. City of Winston-Salem · Zimmerman v. Hogg & Allen, Professional Ass'n · Moore v. Fieldcrest Mills, Inc. · Willetts v. Willetts

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

  1. “[O]nce the defending party forecasts evidence which will be available to him at trial and which tends to establish his right to judgment as a matter of law, the claimant must present a forecast of the evidence which will be available for presentation at trial and which will tend to support his claim for relief.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “A defending party may show as a matter of law that he is entitled to summary judgment in his favor by showing there is no genuine issue of material fact concerning an essential element of the claimant’s claim for relief and that the claimant cannot prove the existence of that element.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “[e]ven where, ... an issue of fact arises, a party may show that it is not a genuine issue as to a material fact by showing that the party with the burden of proof in the action will not be able to present substantial evidence which would allow that issue to be resolved in his favor. [Citations omitted.] Therefore, . . . [it] is not a genuine issue as to a material fact if it can be shown that the plaintiff cannot present a forecast of substantial evidence which will be available to her at trial and which would allow that issue to be resolved in her favor.”
    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.