Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 46 N.C. App. 521 - Heist v. Heist

46 N.C. App. 521 - Heist v. Heist’s Empirical Analysis

1980

Citation profile

36
cited by 36 later decisions
3
states following
April 2016
most recently cited

34 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 36 later decisions — most recently April 2016 · most notably Nelson v. Jacobsen (1983), Fundermann v. Mickelson (1981)

34 state decisions

1401980199020002010decided

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 Anderson Ex Rel. Anderson v. Butler · 6 N.C. App. 201 - Sebastian v. Kluttz · Hoots v. Calaway · Snellings v. Roberts · 12 N.C. App. 476 - Snellings v. Roberts

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

  1. “(1) that he [plaintiff] and his wife were happily married and that a genuine love and affection existed between them; (2) that the love and affection so existing was alienated and destroyed; (3) that the wrongful and malicious acts of the defendant produced and brought about the loss and alienation of such love and affection.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “Punitive damages may be awarded [to plaintiff] in an action of alienation of affections... for the wilful, wanton, aggravated or malicious conduct of defendant towards her. " Heist v. Heist, 46 N.C.App. 521, 526-27 , 265 S.E.2d 434, 438 (1980) (emphasis added); see also Powell v. Strickland, 163 N.C. 393 , 79 S.E. 872 (1913). "It is incumbent on the plaintiff to show circumstances of aggravation in addition to the malice implied by law from the conduct of defendant in causing the separation of plaintiff and her husband which was necessary to sustain a recovery of compensatory damages.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “the controlling or effective cause of the alienation, even though there were other causes, which might have contributed to the alienation.”
    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.