6 North Carolina opinions name it 1 courts 1987–1999 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 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 |
|---|---|---|
Stallings v. Gunter
green
2 sentences1997Stallings v. Gunter, 99 N.C.App. 710, 714 , 394 S.E.2d 212, 215 , disc. rev. denied, 327 N.C. 638 , 399 S.E.2d 125 (1990). 1997Stallings v. Gunter, 99 N.C.App. 710, 714 , 394 S.E.2d 212, 215 , disc. rev. denied, 327 N.C. 638 , 399 S.E.2d 125 (1990). | 2 | 1995–1997 |
Ballenger v. Crowell
green
2 sentences1992The theory is that “so long as the relationship of surgeon and patient continued, the surgeon was guilty of malpractice during that entire relationship for not repairing the damage he had done and, therefore, the cause of action against him arose at the conclusion of his contractual relationship.” Ballenger v. Crowell, 38 N.C. 1987The malpractice in such cases is regarded as a continuing tort because of the persistence of the physician or surgeon in continuing and repeating the wrongful treatment.’ ” Ballenger v. Crowell, 38 N.C. | 2 | 1987–1992 |
Callahan v. Rogers
green
2 sentences1999App. 250 , 365 S.E.2d 717 (1988), our Court held that the trial court erred in granting the defendant’s motion to dismiss the plaintiff’s action based on the three-year statute of limitations where the evidence “tended to show that plaintiff filed the action pursuant to the continued course of treatment exception.” Id. at 252 , 365 S.E.2d at 718 . 1999App. 250 , 365 S.E.2d 717 (1988), our Court held that the trial court erred in granting the defendant’s motion to dismiss the plaintiff’s action based on the three-year statute of limitations where the evidence “tended to show that plaintiff filed the action pursuant to the continued course of treatment exception.” Id. at 252 , 365 S.E.2d at 718 . | 1 | 1999–1999 |
Stallings v. Gunter
green
2 sentences1997Stallings v. Gunter, 99 N.C.App. 710, 714 , 394 S.E.2d 212, 215 , disc. rev. denied, 327 N.C. 638 , 399 S.E.2d 125 (1990). 1997Stallings v. Gunter, 99 N.C.App. 710, 714 , 394 S.E.2d 212, 215 , disc. rev. denied, 327 N.C. 638 , 399 S.E.2d 125 (1990). | 1 | 1997–1997 |
Horton v. Carolina Medicorp, Inc.
green
2 sentences1996North Carolina also recognizes the continued course of treatment doctrine in medical malpractice actions, whereby “the action accrues at the conclusion of the physician’s treatment of the patient, so long as the patient has remained under the continuous treatment of the physician for the injuries which gave rise to the cause of action.” Horton v. Carolina Medicorp, Inc., 119 N.C. 1996App. 777, 779 , 460 S.E.2d 567, 568 , disc. review allowed, 341 N.C. 649 , 462 S.E.2d 511 (1995). | 1 | 1996–1996 |
In re Estate of Pate
green
1 sentence1996App. 777, 779 , 460 S.E.2d 567, 568 , disc. review allowed, 341 N.C. 649 , 462 S.E.2d 511 (1995). | 1 | 1996–1996 |
Gray v. Orange County Health Dept.
neutral
1 sentence1996App. 777, 779 , 460 S.E.2d 567, 568 , disc. review allowed, 341 N.C. 649 , 462 S.E.2d 511 (1995). | 1 | 1996–1996 |