73 N.C. App. 182 - Ipock v. Gilmore’s Empirical Analysis
1985
Citation profile
30 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 30 later decisions — most recently February 2018 · most notably 93 N.C. App. 92 - Warren v. Colombo (1989), 85 N.C. App. 70 - Ipock for Hill v. Gilmore (1987)
30 state decisions
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 Sutton v. Duke · Williams v. Carolina Power & Light Co. · 70 N.C. App. 627 - Estrada v. Jaques · REDEVELOPMENT COM'N OF CITY OF WASHINGTON v. Grimes · Bowen v. Iowa National Mutual Insurance Company
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 30 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(e) The recovery of judgment against one tort-feasor for the injury or wrongful death does not of itself discharge the other tort-feasors from liability to the claimant. The satisfaction of the judgment discharges the other tort-feasors from liability to the claimant for the same injury or wrongful death, but does not impair any right of contribution.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“(f) When affidavits are unavailable. — Should it appear from the affidavits of a party opposing the motion that he cannot for reasons stated present by affidavit facts essential to justify his opposition, the court may refuse the application for judgment or may order a continuance to permit affidavits to be obtained or depositions to be taken or discovery to be had or may make such other order as is just.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“We do note ... that in other suits involving an indirect impact on children, our appellate courts have declined to recognize a cause of action for loss of parental consortium. See Henson v. Thomas, 231 N.C. 173 , 56 S.E.2d 432 (1949); Azzolino v. Dingfelder, 71 N.C.App. 289 , 322 S.E.2d 567 (1984). However, arguably in this case, the impact on the child is directly foreseeable.”
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.