9 North Carolina opinions name it 2 courts 1924–2015 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 |
|---|---|---|
State v. Allengreen2 sentences2015In light of the preceding analysis, we conclude that while there is " some evidence that the implement[s] used [were] not ... firearm[s] or other dangerous weapon[s] which could have threatened or endangered the [lives] of the victim[s]," when considered collectively, the evidence does not conclusively demonstrate that each of the instruments used during the robbery "could not have been a firearm or other dangerous weapon." Allen, 317 N.C. at 124 -25 , 343 S.E.2d at 897 (emphasis added). 2015In light of the preceding analysis, we conclude that while there is " some evidence that the implement[s] used [were] not ... firearm[s] or other dangerous weapon[s] which could have threatened or endangered the [lives] of the victim[s]," when considered collectively, the evidence does not conclusively demonstrate that each of the instruments used during the robbery "could not have been a firearm or other dangerous weapon." Allen, 317 N.C. at 124 -25 , 343 S.E.2d at 897 (emphasis added). | 1 | 1 |
Massachusetts v. Missourigreen2 sentences2002“The original jurisdiction of [the Supreme] Court, in cases where a State is a party, ‘refers to those cases in which, according to the grant of power made in the preceding clause, jurisdiction might be exercised in consequence of the character of the party, and an original suit might be instituted in any of the federal Courts; not to those cases in which an original suit might not be instituted in a federal Court.’ ” Id. at 19-20 , 84 L. 2002“The original jurisdiction of [the Supreme] Court, in cases where a State is a party, ‘refers to those cases in which, according to the grant of power made in the preceding clause, jurisdiction might be exercised in consequence of the character of the party, and an original suit might be instituted in any of the federal Courts; not to those cases in which an original suit might not be instituted in a federal Court.’ ” Id. at 19-20 , 84 L. | 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 |
|---|---|---|
Gibbs v. Carolina Power & Light Company
green
2 sentences1974Gibbs v. Light Co., 265 N.C. 459 , 144 S.E. 2d 393 (1965). 1974Gibbs v. Light Co., 265 N.C. 459 , 144 S.E. 2d 393 (1965). | 1 | 1974–1974 |
Lewis v. Barnhill
green
2 sentences1973Lewis v. Barnhill, 267 N.C. 457 , 148 S.E. 2d 536 (1966); 7 Strong, North Carolina Index 2d Trial § 33, at 330 (1968). 1973Lewis v. Barnhill, 267 N.C. 457 , 148 S.E. 2d 536 (1966); 7 Strong, North Carolina Index 2d Trial § 33, at 330 (1968). | 1 | 1973–1973 |
State v. . McClure
neutral
2 sentences1945Beyond the familiar rule that the charge must be interpreted contextually, we have direct approval of the challenged instruction in S. v. McClure , 166 N.C. 321 , 327 , 81 S.E. 458 . 1945Beyond the familiar rule that the charge must be interpreted contextually, we have direct approval of the challenged instruction in S. v. McClure , 166 N.C. 321 , 327 , 81 S.E. 458 . | 1 | 1945–1945 |
Davis v. . Frazier
green
2 sentences1943Davis v. Frazier, 150 N. C., 447 , 64 S. E., 200 . 1943Davis v. Frazier, 150 N. C., 447 , 64 S. E., 200 . | 1 | 1943–1943 |
Martin v. . Gould
neutral
1 sentence1935In Martin v. Gould, 17 N. C., 305 , where the testator gave his residuary estate “to be equally divided, between my son Daniel and three *694 grandsons (naming them), to them and their heirs forever/’ it was held that although, taking the residuary clause by itself, the grandsons would not take as a class but each an equal share with his uncle, yet, in view of a preceding clause of the will showing that the testator meant to deal equally between his two sons, and to make the children of his deceased son stand in their father’s stead, the son took one-half the residue and the grandsons the othe | 1 | 1935–1935 |
Askew v. . Bynum
neutral
1 sentence1934Inclusion of tbe dwelling-bouse in tbe assignment is not mandatory wben tbe widow requests that it be omitted, but tbis provision does not exempt tbe jury from tbe duty of “having a due regard to tbe interest of tbe beirs as well as to the right of tbe widow.” Sec. 4100; Askew v. Bynum, 81 N. C., 350 ; Caudle v. Caudle, 176 N. C., 537 . | 1 | 1934–1934 |
Caudle v. . Caudle
neutral
1 sentence1934Inclusion of tbe dwelling-bouse in tbe assignment is not mandatory wben tbe widow requests that it be omitted, but tbis provision does not exempt tbe jury from tbe duty of “having a due regard to tbe interest of tbe beirs as well as to the right of tbe widow.” Sec. 4100; Askew v. Bynum, 81 N. C., 350 ; Caudle v. Caudle, 176 N. C., 537 . | 1 | 1934–1934 |
James Trigg v. Thomas S. Drew
neutral
1 sentence1924Greely v. Thompson, 10 How., 225 , 13 L. | 1 | 1924–1924 |
Greely v. Thompson
neutral
1 sentence1924Greely v. Thompson, 10 How., 225 , 13 L. | 1 | 1924–1924 |
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.