68 N.C. App. 525 - Huff v. Chrismon’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

22 state decisions

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

1. “[T]he burden of proof is on the Plaintiff Ronald Gray Berrier. This means that the Plaintiff must prove by the greater weight of the evidence that the conduct of [Defendant] was aggravated, that is, that his negligence, if any, was gross, willful or wanton. I charge you that punitive damages may never be awarded as a matter of right. They may only be awarded when the jury finds that the conduct of the Defendant is so outrageous as to justify punishing him or making an example of him. In a case of alleged negligence, punitive damages may be awarded upon the showing that the negligence was gross, willful or wanton. Negligence is gross, willful or wanton when the wrongdoer acts with a conscious and intentional disregard of and indifference to the rights and safety of others. Upon a showing of gross, willful or wanton negligence, whether to award punitive damages, and within reasonable limits, the amount to be awarded are matters within the sound discretion of the jury.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 94 N.C. App. 773 - Ivey v. Rose · 107 N.C. App. 356 - Berrier v. Thrift

2. “There appears to be a growing trend in this State to maximize the punishment and deterrence which impaired drivers are subjected to. This trend is seen in the recent enactment of the “Safe Roads Act” with its stiff penalties for impaired drivers. . . . This State’s growing concern and outrage stemming from injuries and deaths caused by impaired drivers is further seen in our court’s recognition of a common law dram shop liability.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Biswell v. Duncan · Evans v. Roberson

3. “"[b]y enactment of G.S. 1A-1, the legislature adopted the `notice theory of pleading.' " Roberts v. Memorial Park, 281 N.C. 48, 56 , 187 S.E.2d 721, 725 (1972). In our first case which considered the "notice pleading" theory of the new Rules of Civil Procedure, Justice Sharp (later Chief Justice) wrote: A pleading complies with the rule if it gives sufficient notice of the events or transactions which produced the claim to enable the adverse party to understand the nature of it and the basis for it, to file a responsive pleading, and— by using the rules provided for obtaining pretrial discovery—to get any additional information he may need to prepare for trial. Sutton v. Duke, 277 N.C. 94, 104 , 176 S.E.2d 161, 167 (1970). Accord: Presnell v. Pell, 298 N.C. 715 , 260 S.E.2d 611 (1979); Brewer v. Harris, 279 N.C. 288 , 182 S.E.2d 345 (1971).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 109 N.C. App. 403 - Holloway v. Wachovia Bank & Trust Co., N.A.