7 North Carolina opinions name it 2 courts 2018–2023 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.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Harte-Hanks Communications, Inc. v. Connaughtongreen2 sentences2023This whole record review “does not empower an appellate court to ignore a trial court’s factual determinations[,]” id.; rather, the underlying “credibility determinations are reviewed under the clearly-erroneous standard because the trier of fact has had the opportunity to observe the demeanor of the witnesses[.]” Desmond v. News & Observer Publ’g Co., 375 N.C. 21 , 43 (2020) (quoting Harte-Hanks Commc’ns, Inc. v. Connaughton, 491 U.S. 657, 689 (1989)). 2020However, “credibility determinations are reviewed under the clearly-erroneous standard, because the trier of fact has had the ‘opportunity to observe the demeanor of the witnesses[.]’” Harte-Hanks, 491 U.S. at 688 , 105 L. | 4 | 7 |
New York Times Co. v. Sullivangreen2 sentences2020Harte-Hanks, 491 U.S. at 685–89 (cleaned up); see also Bose Corp. v. Consumers Union of U.S., Inc., 466 U.S. 485, 499 (1984) (“[I]n cases raising First Amendment issues we have repeatedly held that an appellate court has an obligation to ‘make an independent examination of the whole record’ in order to make sure that ‘the judgment does not constitute a forbidden intrusion on the field of free expression.’ ” (quoting New York Times, 376 U.S. at 284–86)).16 16 Amici, The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, citing Bose Corp. v. Consumers Union of the United States, Inc., contend that th 2020Harte-Hanks, 491 U.S. at 685–89 (cleaned up); see also Bose Corp. v. Consumers Union of U.S., Inc., 466 U.S. 485, 499 (1984) (“[I]n cases raising First Amendment issues we have repeatedly held that an appellate court has an obligation to ‘make an independent examination of the whole record’ in order to make sure that ‘the judgment does not constitute a forbidden intrusion on the field of free expression.’ ” (quoting New York Times, 376 U.S. at 284–86)).16 Amici, The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, citing Bose Corp. v. 16 Consumers Union of the United States, Inc., contend that th | 2 | 2 |
Bose Corp. v. Consumers Union of United States, Inc.green2 sentences2020Harte-Hanks, 491 U.S. at 685–89 (cleaned up); see also Bose Corp. v. Consumers Union of U.S., Inc., 466 U.S. 485, 499 (1984) (“[I]n cases raising First Amendment issues we have repeatedly held that an appellate court has an obligation to ‘make an independent examination of the whole record’ in order to make sure that ‘the judgment does not constitute a forbidden intrusion on the field of free expression.’ ” (quoting New York Times, 376 U.S. at 284–86)).16 16 Amici, The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, citing Bose Corp. v. Consumers Union of the United States, Inc., contend that th 2020Harte-Hanks, 491 U.S. at 685–89 (cleaned up); see also Bose Corp. v. Consumers Union of U.S., Inc., 466 U.S. 485, 499 (1984) (“[I]n cases raising First Amendment issues we have repeatedly held that an appellate court has an obligation to ‘make an independent examination of the whole record’ in order to make sure that ‘the judgment does not constitute a forbidden intrusion on the field of free expression.’ ” (quoting New York Times, 376 U.S. at 284–86)).16 Amici, The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, citing Bose Corp. v. 16 Consumers Union of the United States, Inc., contend that th | 2 | 2 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in North Carolina. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
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.