libel claim (North Carolina) · Go Syfert
← North Carolina issues

libel claim in North Carolina

7 North Carolina opinions name it 3 courts 1993–2025 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 (4)

CaseFollowedCited
Dickens v. Thornegreen
ncctapp · 1993 · cited in 1 North Carolina opinions naming this issue, 2017–2017
2 sentences

2017See Dickens v. Thorne , 110 N.C.App. 39 , 47, 429 S.E.2d 176 , 181 (1993) (rejecting the argument that an employee's employment contract with a county was sufficient to trigger a waiver of governmental immunity for tort liability on a libel claim because the complaint was not based on a breach of contract).

2017See Dickens v. Thorne , 110 N.C.App. 39 , 47, 429 S.E.2d 176 , 181 (1993) (rejecting the argument that an employee's employment contract with a county was sufficient to trigger a waiver of governmental immunity for tort liability on a libel claim because the complaint was not based on a breach of contract).

11
Walden v. Fioregreen
scotus · 2014 · cited in 1 North Carolina opinions naming this issue, 2017–2017
1 sentence

2017Compare Walden, 134 S. Ct. at 1124 (holding that a Nevada court lacked personal jurisdiction when defendant “never traveled to, conducted activities within, contacted anyone in, or sent anything or anyone to Nevada”), with Calder, 465 U.S. at 785–86, 788–89 (holding that a California court had personal jurisdiction over defendant on a libel claim where defendant contacted sources in California for information used in the article at issue and frequently traveled to California for business, the acts described in the article occurred in California, the article was distributed in California, and p

11
Calder v. Jonesgreen
scotus · 1984 · cited in 1 North Carolina opinions naming this issue, 2017–2017
1 sentence

2017Compare Walden, 134 S. Ct. at 1124 (holding that a Nevada court lacked personal jurisdiction when defendant “never traveled to, conducted activities within, contacted anyone in, or sent anything or anyone to Nevada”), with Calder, 465 U.S. at 785–86, 788–89 (holding that a California court had personal jurisdiction over defendant on a libel claim where defendant contacted sources in California for information used in the article at issue and frequently traveled to California for business, the acts described in the article occurred in California, the article was distributed in California, and p

11
Martin Marietta Corp. v. Wake Stone Corp.green
ncctapp · 1993 · cited in 1 North Carolina opinions naming this issue, 2008–2008
1 sentence

2008See, e.g., Martin Marietta Corp. v. Wake Stone Corp., 111 N.C.

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 (2)

CaseCitedYears
Ellis v. Northern Star Co. green
nc · 1990
2 sentences

1999The libel claim was submitted to the jury, which found that the defendant had maliciously libeled the plaintiff and awarded compensatory and punitive damages. *157 On appeal, the defendant argued that the “letter [was] not defamatory at all or, alternatively, it [was] susceptible of both defamatory and nondefamatory interpretations.” Id. at 224 , 388 S.E.2d at 130 .

1999The libel claim was submitted to the jury, which found that the defendant had maliciously libeled the plaintiff and awarded compensatory and punitive damages. *157 On appeal, the defendant argued that the “letter [was] not defamatory at all or, alternatively, it [was] susceptible of both defamatory and nondefamatory interpretations.” Id. at 224 , 388 S.E.2d at 130 .

31993–1999
Daniels v. Metro Magazine Holding Co., L.L.C. green
ncctapp · 2006
1 sentence

2025In Daniels v. Metro Magazine Holding Co., LLC, the Court of Appeals considered a libel claim arising out of an article the defendant wrote and published. 179 N.C.

12025–2025

Statutes the citing opinions construe

NC § N.C. Gen. Stat. § 75-1.1 (3) NC § N.C. Gen. Stat. § 75-16 (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

TX 44 (1986–2024) CA 43 (1969–2026) NY 33 (1922–2026) OH 22 (1988–2026) GA 15 (1984–2024) MA 12 (1984–2024) NC 7 (1993–2025) AL 5 (1987–2026) TN 4 (1997–2020) MS 4 (1990–2010) OK 4 (1993–2014) FL 4 (1985–2006) KS 4 (1976–2026) IL 4 (1988–2007) OR 4 (1984–2022) MI 3 (1992–2025) PA 3 (1923–2016) SD 3 (1996–2009) NM 3 (1973–1988) VT 2 (2012–2025) NJ 2 (1910–2017) DE 2 (1988–2020) ME 2 (2017–2019)

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