sort presumption (North Carolina) · Go Syfert
← North Carolina issues

sort presumption in North Carolina

7 North Carolina opinions name it 2 courts 2018–2026 6 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 (5)

CaseFollowedCited
Myers v. McGradygreen
nc · 2006 · cited in 2 North Carolina opinions naming this issue, 2022–2022
2 sentences

2022On the contrary, this Court has held that, when the General Assembly “has vested [a state agency] with broad powers to protect the health and well-being of the general public,” the discretionary decisions that it makes in exercising that authority “are not generally the type of decisions for which the State is liable to private citizens in tort.” Myers v. McGrady, 360 N.C. 460, 468 (2006). ¶ 35 In addition, the plain language of the State Tort Claims Act forecloses claims like those that plaintiffs have attempted to assert in this case.

2022On the contrary, this Court has held that, when the General Assembly “has vested [a state agency] with broad powers to protect the health and well-being of the general public,” the discretionary decisions that it makes in exercising that authority “are not generally the type of decisions for which the State is liable to private citizens in tort.” Myers v. McGrady, 360 N.C. 460, 468 (2006). ¶ 35 In addition, the plain language of the State Tort Claims Act forecloses claims like those that plaintiffs have attempted to assert in this case.

22
Westminster Homes, Inc. v. Town of Cary Zoning Board of Adjustmentgreen
nc · 2001 · cited in 2 North Carolina opinions naming this issue, 2022–2022
2 sentences

2022See Westminster Homes Inc. v. Town of Cary, 354 N.C. 298 , 305–06, 554 S.E.2d 634, 639 (2001). ¶ 30 But we cannot reach that step unless we first determine that there is a conflict.

2022See Westminster Homes Inc. v. Town of Cary, 354 N.C. 298 , 305–06, 554 S.E.2d 634, 639 (2001). ¶ 30 But we cannot reach that step unless we first determine that there is a conflict.

22
Yarborough v. Hughes.green
nc · 1905 · cited in 1 North Carolina opinions naming this issue, 2026–2026
2 sentences

2026“The rule is founded on a sort of presumption that there is something in the evidence withheld which makes against the party not producing it.” Id. at 209 (extraneities omitted).

2026Application of the rule provides “a significant fact for the consideration of the jury,” id. at 210 , and “is classed among the strongest circumstantial proofs” against the party that withholds evidence in its possession, id. (citing Black v. Wright, 31 N.C. (9 Ired.) 447 , 451–52 (1849)).

11
State v. Wilsongreen
ncctapp · 2014 · cited in 1 North Carolina opinions naming this issue, 2026–2026
1 sentence

2026See State v. Wilson, 236 N.C.

11
State v. Eldergreen
nc · 2015 · cited in 1 North Carolina opinions naming this issue, 2018–2018
2 sentences

2018See generally Elder , 368 N.C. 70 , 773 S.E.2d 51 .

2018See generally Elder , 368 N.C. 70 , 773 S.E.2d 51 .

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 (1)

CaseCitedYears
Black v. . Wright green
nc · 1849
1 sentence

2026Application of the rule provides “a significant fact for the consideration of the jury,” id. at 210 , and “is classed among the strongest circumstantial proofs” against the party that withholds evidence in its possession, id. (citing Black v. Wright, 31 N.C. (9 Ired.) 447 , 451–52 (1849)).

12026–2026

Statutes the citing opinions construe

NC § N.C. Gen. Stat. § 7A-27 (4) NC § N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1A-1 (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

CA 57 (1914–2026) TX 36 (1981–2026) LA 28 (1964–2023) IL 24 (1935–2025) PA 17 (1955–2025) IN 17 (1862–2018) MI 17 (1970–2026) OR 14 (1918–2021) GA 12 (1972–2025) NY 11 (1903–2010) MA 10 (1832–2010) UT 10 (1945–2026) MS 10 (1907–2018) AL 10 (1927–2026) MN 9 (1925–2016) MO 8 (1915–2018) AR 8 (1921–2024) AZ 8 (1948–2010) CO 7 (1927–2024) KY 7 (1927–2025) NC 7 (2018–2026) MD 7 (1977–2025) WA 6 (1989–2019) WI 6 (1990–2005) OH 6 (1993–2012) MT 6 (1887–2012) VT 6 (1965–2025) WY 5 (1906–2017) KS 5 (1921–2024) AK 5 (1976–2025) NJ 5 (1991–2020) DC 5 (1975–2015) NE 4 (1923–2025) IA 3 (1985–2024) FL 3 (1987–1993) WV 3 (1982–2002) TN 3 (2008–2017) VA 3 (1987–2019) SC 2 (2021–2021) SD 2 (1929–1979) RI 2 (1991–2024) OK 2 (1995–1995) DE 2 (2004–2004)

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