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.
8 North Carolina opinions name it 3 courts 1980–2022 2 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 |
|---|---|---|
| No positive-treatment citations attached to this issue in North Carolina. | ||
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in North Carolina. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
RPR & Associates, Inc. v. State
green
2 sentences2022As a result, it can claim the protection of sovereign immunity. ¶ 23 The protection of sovereign immunity extends beyond just a mere “defense in a lawsuit”; a “valid claim . . . is in essence immunity from suit.” RPR, 139 N.C. 2022As a result, it can claim the protection of sovereign immunity. ¶ 23 The protection of sovereign immunity extends beyond just a mere “defense in a lawsuit”; a “valid claim . . . is in essence immunity from suit.” RPR, 139 N.C. | 2 | 2022–2022 |
Guthrie v. North Carolina State Ports Authority
green
2 sentences2013WAS SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY WAIVED? {34} Waiver can occur by statutory authorization, id. at 522 , 299 S.E.2d at 618 , or under the common law. 2013WAS SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY WAIVED? {34} Waiver can occur by statutory authorization, id. at 522 , 299 S.E.2d at 618 , or under the common law. | 2 | 2013–2013 |
Smith v. State
green
2 sentences1997When this occurs, the State “cannot invoke the protection of sovereign immunity.” Id. at 315 , 222 S.E.2d at 421 . 1997When this occurs, the State “cannot invoke the protection of sovereign immunity.” Id. at 315 , 222 S.E.2d at 421 . | 2 | 1980–1997 |
Casey v. Wake County
green
1 sentence2000We reasoned that: “Providing for the health and welfare of the citizens of the county is a legitimate and traditional function of county government.” [Casey v. Wake County, 45 N.C. | 1 | 2000–2000 |
Chesapeake Bay Bridge And Tunnel District v. J. Lauritzen
green
1 sentence1983Chesapeake Bay Bridge and Tunnel District v. Lauritzen, 404 F. 2d 1001 ; Parden v. Terminal R. | 1 | 1983–1983 |
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.
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.