Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 66 N.C. App. 161 - Rose v. Rose

66 N.C. App. 161 - Rose v. Rose’s Empirical Analysis

1984

Citation profile

12
cited by 12 later decisions
1
states following
February 2012
most recently cited

12 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently February 2012

12 state decisions

401984199020002010decided

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 Munchak Corp. v. Caldwell · McLean v. Keith · Moore v. Moore · Burke v. Burke · Burke v. Burke

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

  1. “We note that the trial court found that Defendant was deliberately squandering his assets, in the face of his undisputed child support and alimony liabilities. The remedy of specific performance, therefore, does no more than”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “A damage award in this case, defendant being insolvent, will not compensate plaintiff nor compel defendant to perform his part of the bargain. The parties' contract had clear and definite terms.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “compel [defendant] to do precisely what he ought to have done without being coerced by the court.”
    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.