Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 60 N.C. App. 450 - State v. Hall

60 N.C. App. 450 - State v. Hall’s Empirical Analysis

1983

Citation profile

16
cited by 16 later decisions
1
states following
August 2013
most recently cited

14 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 16 later decisions — most recently August 2013

14 state decisions

801983199020002010decided

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 State v. Johnson · State v. McMorris · State v. Braxton · State v. Everhart · State v. . Satterfield

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

  1. “as a cause: (1) which, in a natural and continuous sequence and unbroken by any new and independent cause, produces an injury; (2) without which the injury would not have occurred; and (3) from which a person of ordinary prudence could have reasonably foreseen that such a result, or some similar injurious result, was probable under the facts as they existed.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “The second element the State must prove is what is called proximate cause. It is a legal term. The State must prove that the defendant’s act proximately caused the victim’s death. What is a proximate cause? It is a real cause, a cause without which the victim’s death would not have occurred. Now the defendant’s act need not have been the only cause nor the last cause or the nearest cause. It is sufficient if it occurred with some other cause acting at the same time, which in combination with it caused the death of the victim Gregory Linton.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  3. “Foreseeability is a requisite of proximate cause. We have previously pointed this out and ordered a new trial where a proper definition of proximate cause was not given in a civil action. [Citation omitted.] It is all the more imperative that all of the necessary elements including a correct definition of proximate cause ... be given in a criminal case.”
    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.