Ellis v. N. Star Co., 392 S.E.2d 89 (N.C. 1990). · Go Syfert
Ellis v. N. Star Co., 392 S.E.2d 89 (N.C. 1990). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
33 citation events (17 in the last 25 years) across 4 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Murray v. Nationwide Mutual Insurance (ncctapp, 1996-07-02)
Treatment trajectory · 1990 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1990 2008 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 11 distinct citers. How cited ↗
examined Cited as authority (quoted) Murray v. Nationwide Mutual Insurance (2×)
N.C. Ct. App. · 1996 · quote attribution · 2 verbatim quotes · confidence low
defendants libeled ellis brokerage company by impeaching it in its trade, thereby proximately causing it actual injury and damages
discussed Cited "see" Nucor Corp. v. Prudential Equity Group, LLC (2×)
N.C. Ct. App. · 2008 · signal: see · confidence high
See Ellis v. Northern Star Co., 326 N.C. 219, 221 , 388 S.E.2d 127, 128 , rehearing denied, 326 N.C. 488 , 392 S.E.2d 89 (1990); Ausley v. Bishop, 133 N.C.
discussed Cited "see" Dalenko v. WAKE COUNTY DEPT. OF HUMAN SERV.
N.C. Ct. App. · 2003 · signal: see · confidence high
See Harwood v. Johnson, 326 N.C. 231, 237 , 388 S.E.2d 439, 443 (where suit cannot be maintained against governmental entity, suit may not be maintained against employee of that entity for actions taken in employee's official capacity), reh'g denied, 326 N.C. 488 , 392 S.E.2d 90 (1990).
discussed Cited "see" Dalenko v. Wake County Department of Human Services
N.C. Ct. App. · 2003 · signal: see · confidence high
See Harwood v. Johnson, 326 N.C. 231, 237 , 388 S.E.2d 439, 443 (where suit cannot be maintained against governmental entity, suit may not be maintained against employee of that entity for actions taken in employee’s official capacity), reh’g denied, 326 N.C. 488 , 392 S.E.2d 90 (1990).
discussed Cited "see" Ausley v. Bishop (2×)
N.C. Ct. App. · 1999 · signal: see · confidence high
See Ellis v. Northern Star Co., 326 N.C. 219, 226 , 388 S.E.2d 127, 130 , reh’g denied, 326 N.C. 488 , 392 S.E.2d 89 (1990).
discussed Cited "see" Shaw v. Stroud
4th Cir. · 1994 · signal: accord · confidence high
Accord Harwood v. Johnson, 92 N.C.App. 306 , 374 S.E.2d 401 (App.1988), aff'd in part, rev’d in part on other grounds, 326 N.C. 231 , 388 S.E.2d 439 (1990), reh’g denied, 326 N.C. 488 , 392 S.E.2d 90 (1990); Piggot v. City of Wilmington, 50 N.CApp. 401, 273 S.E.2d 752 (1981).
discussed Cited "see" Deborah Shaw, Administratrix of the Estate of Sidney Bowen, Deceased Nancy Bowen, Individually, and as Guardian Ad Litem for Kimberly Yvonne Bowen and Lee Frederick Bowen, the Minor Children of Sidney Bowen v. C.I. Stroud, Individually, and Alfred E. Morris, J.M. Smith J.A. McVicker J.H. Parks, in Their Individual Capacities, Deborah Shaw, Administratrix of the Estate of Sidney Bowen, Deceased Nancy Bowen, Individually, and as Guardian Ad Litem for Kimberly Yvonne Bowen and Lee Frederick Bowen, the Minor Children of Sidney Bowen v. Alfred E. Morris C.I. Stroud, J.M. Smith, in Their Individual Capacities, and J.A. McVicker J.H. Parks, in Their Individual Capacities, Deborah Shaw, Administratrix of the Estate of Sidney Bowen, Deceased Nancy Bowen, Individually, and as Guardian Ad Litem for Kimberly Yvonne Bowen and Lee Frederick Bowen, the Minor Children of Sidney Bowen v. C.I. Stroud Alfred E. Morris J.M. Smith, in Their Individual Capacities, Deborah Shaw, Administratrix of the Estate of Sidney Bowen, Deceased Nancy Bowen, Individually, and as Guardian Ad Litem for Kimberly Yvonne Bowen and Lee Frederick Bowen, the Minor Children of Sidney Bowen v. C.I. Stroud, Individually
4th Cir. · 1994 · signal: accord · confidence high
Accord Harwood v. Johnson, 92 N.C.App. 306 , 374 S.E.2d 401 (App.1988), aff'd in part, rev'd in part on other grounds, 326 N.C. 231 , 388 S.E.2d 439 (1990), reh'g denied, 326 N.C. 488 , 392 S.E.2d 90 (1990); Piggot v. City of Wilmington, 50 N.C.App. 401 , 273 S.E.2d 752 (1981).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." MRD Motorsports, Inc. v. Trail Motorsports, LLC (2×)
N.C. Ct. App. · 2010 · signal: see also · confidence low
App. 447, 448 , 388 S.E.2d 571, 572 , disc. review denied, 326 N.C. 597 , 393 S.E.2d 880 (1990); see also Ellis v. No. Star Co., 326 N.C. 219, 227 , 388 S.E.2d 127, 132 (“Plaintiffs may in proper cases elect to recover either punitive damages under a common law claim or treble damages under N.C.G.S. § 75-16, but they may not recover both.”), reh’g denied, 326 N.C. 488 , 392 S.E.2d 89 (1990).
cited Cited "see, e.g." Hemric v. Groce
N.C. Ct. App. · 2005 · signal: see also · confidence low
App. 181, 185 , 571 S.E.2d 845, 848 (2002) (emphasis supplied); see also Harwood v. Johnson, 326 N.C. 231 , 388 S.E.2d 439 , reh’g denied, 326 N.C. 488 , 392 S.E.2d 90 (1990).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Price v. Davis
N.C. Ct. App. · 1999 · signal: see also · confidence low
Moreover, “[t]he provision of police services, and the erection and operation of prisons and jails, have previously been determined to *560 constitute governmental functions.” Kephart, supra (citations omitted) (holding actions of county officials in maintaining confinement facilities constitute governmental functions for purposes of applying sovereign immunity); see also, Harwood v. Johnson, 326 N.C. 231 , 388 S.E.2d 439 , reh’g denied, 326 N.C. 488 , 392 S.E.2d 90 (1990).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Stanley v. Moore (2×)
N.C. · 1995 · signal: see also · confidence low
App. 333 , 342 S.E.2d 57 (1986) (noting that when the same course of conduct supports claims for fraud and for an unfair and deceptive trade practice, recovery can be had on either claim, but not on both); see also Ellis v. Northern Star, 326 N.C. 219, 227-28 , 388 S.E.2d 127, 132 (“Plaintiffs may in proper cases elect to recover either punitive damages under a common law claim or treble damages under N.C.G.S. § 75-16, but they may not recover both.”), reh’g denied, 326 N.C. 488 , 392 S.E.2d 89 (1990).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Earl ELLIS and Ellis Brokerage Company, Inc.
v.
NORTHERN STAR COMPANY and Thomas W. Kenney.
192PA89.
Supreme Court of North Carolina.
Apr 5, 1990.
392 S.E.2d 89

Graham & James, Raleigh, for plaintiffs.

Morris, Bell & Morris, Asheville, for defendants.

ORDER

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Defendants in this matter for rehearing of the decision of this Court pursuant to Rule 31, N.C.Rules of Appellate Procedure, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

[*90] "Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 5th day of April 1990."