Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
5 North Carolina opinions name it 3 courts 1964–2018 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by North Carolina courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Filmar Racing, Inc. v. Stewartgreen2 sentences2018Lenders Funding also points to the oft-stated rule that “the complaint must admit of no motive for interference other than malice.” E.g., Filmar Racing, Inc. v. Stewart, 141 N.C. 2018App. 668, 674 , 541 S.E.2d 733, 738 (2001); Kerry Bodenhamer Farms, 2017 NCBC LEXIS 27 , at *16. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Taylorgreen2 sentences1991G.S. § 15A-1340.4(a); State v. Taylor, 322 N.C. 280, 286 , 367 S.E.2d 664, 668 (1988). 1991G.S. § 15A-1340.4(a); State v. Taylor, 322 N.C. 280, 286 , 367 S.E.2d 664, 668 (1988). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in North Carolina. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Walker
green
2 sentences1976Measured by the applicable and oft-stated rule (see State v. Walker, 266 N.C. 269 , 145 S.E. 2d 833 (1966)), the testimony of the following witnesses sufficed to take the case to the jury on the question of defendants’ guilt of the felony murder for which they were convicted: (1) Mrs. Barwick’s identification of defendants as two of the three men who were in Grant’s store on the occasion of the robbery and homicide and her chronology of the events occurring while they were in the store, which tended to implicate all three in the robbery; (2) Lucinda Carol Kornegay’s testimony tending to show t 1976Measured by the applicable and oft-stated rule (see State v. Walker, 266 N.C. 269 , 145 S.E. 2d 833 (1966)), the testimony of the following witnesses sufficed to take the case to the jury on the question of defendants’ guilt of the felony murder for which they were convicted: (1) Mrs. Barwick’s identification of defendants as two of the three men who were in Grant’s store on the occasion of the robbery and homicide and her chronology of the events occurring while they were in the store, which tended to implicate all three in the robbery; (2) Lucinda Carol Kornegay’s testimony tending to show t | 1 | 1976–1976 |
Lamm v. Lorbacher
green
2 sentences1965Lamm v. Lorbacher, 235 N.C. 728 , 71 S.E. 2d 49 , and cases cited. 1965Lamm v. Lorbacher, 235 N.C. 728 , 71 S.E. 2d 49 , and cases cited. | 1 | 1965–1965 |
CCT Equipment Co. v. Hertz Corporation
green
2 sentences1964In Equipment Co. v. Hertz Corp. and Contractors, Inc. v. Hertz Corp., 256 N.C. 277 , 123 S.E. 2d 802 , stressed by plaintiff, a similar ramp was used as a crossing by the earth movers of the State Highway Commission’s contractor. 1964In Equipment Co. v. Hertz Corp. and Contractors, Inc. v. Hertz Corp., 256 N.C. 277 , 123 S.E. 2d 802 , stressed by plaintiff, a similar ramp was used as a crossing by the earth movers of the State Highway Commission’s contractor. | 1 | 1964–1964 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.