Washington factors (North Carolina) · Go Syfert
← North Carolina issues

Washington factors in North Carolina

12 North Carolina opinions name it 2 courts 1984–2024 1 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.

Followed or applied (7)

CaseFollowedCited
Thorpe v. Perry-Riddickgreen
ncctapp · 2001 · cited in 5 North Carolina opinions naming this issue, 2002–2014
2 sentences

2007Moreover, when examining a trial court’s decision to award attorney fees, this Court require [s] more than “[m]ere recitation by the trial court that it has considered all Washington factors.” Thorpe v. Perry-Riddick, *160 144 N.C.

2004Thus, when we examine a trial court’s decision concerning whether to award attorney’s fees, we require more than “[m]ere recitation by the trial court that it has considered all Washington factors.” Thorpe v. Perry-Riddick, 144 N.C.

25
Tew v. Westgreen
ncctapp · 2001 · cited in 3 North Carolina opinions naming this issue, 2001–2014
2 sentences

2014Rather, the trial court must merely make findings as to "those facts matching those Washington factors apposite to the instant case." Id., 132 N.C.

2004While a “[m]ere recitation by the trial court that it has considered all [the] Washington factors” without making additional findings of fact is inadequate, id. at 572, 551 S.E.2d at 857 , “the trial court is not required to make detailed findings for each factor.” Id. (citing Tew v. West, 143 N.C.

13
Messina v. Bellgreen
ncctapp · 2003 · cited in 1 North Carolina opinions naming this issue, 2014–2014
2 sentences

2014App. 111, 115 , 581 S.E.2d 80, 84 (2003) (“From the findings, it is clear that the trial court exercised its discretion by considering the whole record and in applying the Washington factors.

2014App. 111, 115 , 581 S.E.2d 80, 84 (2003) (“From the findings, it is clear that the trial court exercised its discretion by considering the whole record and in applying the Washington factors.

11
In Re the Appeal From the Civil Penaltygreen
nc · 1989 · cited in 1 North Carolina opinions naming this issue, 2006–2006
2 sentences

2006The trial court set forth extensive findings addressing the Washington factors and in consideration thereof reasoned that "Plaintiff should recover attorney's fees in the amount of $500.00." Reviewing the trial court's plenary findings and following the mandate of Whiteside, see In the Matter of Appeal from Civil Penalty, 324 N.C. 373, 384 , 379 S.E.2d 30, 37 (1989) ("a panel of the Court of Appeals is bound by a prior decision of another panel of the same court addressing the same question, but in a different case, unless overturned by an intervening decision from a higher court"), I cannot s

2006The trial court set forth extensive findings addressing the Washington factors and in consideration thereof reasoned that "Plaintiff should recover attorney's fees in the amount of $500.00." Reviewing the trial court's plenary findings and following the mandate of Whiteside, see In the Matter of Appeal from Civil Penalty, 324 N.C. 373, 384 , 379 S.E.2d 30, 37 (1989) ("a panel of the Court of Appeals is bound by a prior decision of another panel of the same court addressing the same question, but in a different case, unless overturned by an intervening decision from a higher court"), I cannot s

11
Robinson v. Shuegreen
ncctapp · 2001 · cited in 1 North Carolina opinions naming this issue, 2003–2003
2 sentences

2003See id.

2003See id.

11
Hicks v. Albertsongreen
ncctapp · 1973 · cited in 1 North Carolina opinions naming this issue, 2000–2000
2 sentences

2000See Hicks v. Albertson, 18 N.C.

2000See Hicks v. Albertson, 18 N.C.

11
In Re the Marriage of Browngreen
wash · 1984 · cited in 1 North Carolina opinions naming this issue, 1986–1986
2 sentences

1986Accord In re Marriage of Brown, 100 Wash.2d 729 , 675 P.2d 1207 (1984) ( en banc, overturning ninety-two-year-old Washington rule that personal injury recoveries are community property).

1986Accord In re Marriage of Brown, 100 Wash.2d 729 , 675 P.2d 1207 (1984) ( en banc, overturning ninety-two-year-old Washington rule that personal injury recoveries are community property).

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in North Carolina. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (3)

CaseCitedYears
Corum v. University of North Carolina green
· 1992
1 sentence

2024Corum made the point most clearly, mooring this Court’s power to craft remedies to “the nature of constitutional government.” Corum, 330 N.C. at 788 .

12024–2024
Washington v. Horton green
ncctapp · 1999
2 sentences

2014In its order awarding attorneys’ fees to plaintiff, the trial court made findings of fact that: defendant’s insurance carrier denied liability for the accident prior to litigation; defendant did not make an offer of judgment to plaintiff; at mediation, plaintiff refused to settle for less than $35,000.00 and defendant’s insurance carrier offered $5,500.00 to settle the case before an impasse was declared; a jury awarded plaintiff $6,600.00; defendant’s insurance carrier did not -6- exercise superior bargaining power; and “[t]he Court recalls the trial of this case and the issues involved, and

2014Rather, the trial court must merely make findings as to "those facts matching those Washington factors apposite to the instant case." Id., 132 N.C.

12014–2014
McNeal v. Allen green
wash · 1980
2 sentences

1984In McNeal v. Allen, 95 Wash.2d 265 , 621 P.2d 1285 (1980), the Supreme Court of Washington rejected the notion that a doctor could sue in defamation for a violation of Washington's rule against stating the amount of damages sought in a malpractice action.

1984In McNeal v. Allen, 95 Wash.2d 265 , 621 P.2d 1285 (1980), the Supreme Court of Washington rejected the notion that a doctor could sue in defamation for a violation of Washington's rule against stating the amount of damages sought in a malpractice action.

11984–1984

Statutes the citing opinions construe

NC § N.C. Gen. Stat. § 6-21.1 (9) NC § N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1A-1 (3) NC § N.C. Gen. Stat. § 6-20 (3)

Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.

Where else courts name it

WA 235 (1947–2026) IL 25 (1996–2026) PA 21 (1969–2026) CA 17 (1946–2025) FL 17 (1984–2019) OH 13 (2000–2026) TX 13 (1963–2024) NC 12 (1984–2024) OR 9 (1974–2022) GA 8 (2003–2021) ID 8 (1916–2018) WI 8 (1987–2026) IN 8 (2000–2019) MS 8 (1984–2025) DE 7 (1943–2025) AL 7 (1971–2015) NY 6 (1959–2020) MI 6 (1971–2025) MD 6 (1985–2024) MN 5 (1925–2006) CO 4 (1993–2012) IA 4 (1990–2025) AZ 4 (1968–2017) LA 3 (2001–2016) AK 3 (1973–2010) OK 3 (1972–2011) VA 3 (2006–2010) KS 3 (1997–2021) UT 3 (1989–2026) NJ 2 (1938–2019) MT 2 (2004–2007) AR 2 (2013–2021) MA 2 (1998–2017) SC 2 (2020–2020) WY 2 (1992–2024) NM 2 (1970–2010) MO 2 (2004–2017) HI 2 (2002–2002)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check