Ellis v. Williams’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “In both of the cases cited [ West v. Slick, 60 N.C.App. 345 , 299 S.E.2d 657 (1983), aff'd in relevant part, 313 N.C. 33 , 326 S.E.2d 601 (1985), and Beaver v. Hancock, 72 N.C.App. 306 , 324 S.E.2d 294 (1985) ], however, the appeal was limited to a single ruling on a single contention. Here, plaintiffs seek to appeal rulings not only on a number of separate causes of action but also to argue rulings on their requests for discovery. As defendants correctly point out, an appellant's failure to identify such disparate errors in the record frustrates effective and fair preparation of the record, see App.R. 11(b) (proposed record must contain assignments of error required by App.R. 9(a)(1)(xi)), and hinders effective consideration by the appellate courts. See App.R. 10, Drafting Committee Note (exceptions and assignments focus issues on appeal).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Ellis v. Williams