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.
6 North Carolina opinions name it 2 courts 2007–2021 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 |
|---|---|---|
Nixon v. Shrink Missouri Government PACgreen2 sentences2021See, e.g., Nixon v. Shrink Mo. Gov’t PAC, 528 U.S. 377, 386 , 145 L. 2021See, e.g., Nixon v. Shrink Mo. Gov’t PAC, 528 U.S. 377, 386 , 145 L. | 2 | 2 |
Grayned v. City of Rockfordgreen2 sentences2021BARBER 2021-NCCOA-695 INMAN, J., concurring in part and concurring in the result in part (describing the O’Brien test as “intermediate scrutiny” alongside “the similar standard applicable to merely time, place, and manner restrictions”). ¶ 49 In my view, the Building Rule places at least an incidental burden on speech, as it explicitly includes “singing, clapping, shouting, [and] playing instruments” as “nonexclusive examples of behaviors that may disturb the General Assembly.” If a city noise ordinance that “forbids deliberately noisy or diversionary activity that disrupts or is about to disr 2021BARBER 2021-NCCOA-695 INMAN, J., concurring in part and concurring in the result in part (describing the O’Brien test as “intermediate scrutiny” alongside “the similar standard applicable to merely time, place, and manner restrictions”). ¶ 49 In my view, the Building Rule places at least an incidental burden on speech, as it explicitly includes “singing, clapping, shouting, [and] playing instruments” as “nonexclusive examples of behaviors that may disturb the General Assembly.” If a city noise ordinance that “forbids deliberately noisy or diversionary activity that disrupts or is about to disr | 2 | 2 |
Clark v. Community for Creative Non-Violencegreen2 sentences2021See Clark v. Cmty. for Creative Non-Violence, 468 U.S. 288, 298 , 82 L. 2021See Clark v. Cmty. for Creative Non-Violence, 468 U.S. 288, 298 , 82 L. | 2 | 2 |
Broadrick v. Oklahomagreen2 sentences2012The statute’s compliance with this last prong of the O’Brien test effectively forecloses plaintiffs’ overbreadth argument, which formed the basis of the Court of Appeals’ decision. “ [Particularly where conduct and not merely speech is involved, we believe that the over- breadth of a statute must not only be real, but substantial as well, judged in relation to the statute’s plainly legitimate sweep.” Broadrick v. Oklahoma, 413 U.S. 601, 615 , 93 S. Ct. 2908, 2918 (1973). 2012The statute’s compliance with this last prong of the O’Brien test effectively forecloses plaintiffs’ overbreadth argument, which formed the basis of the Court of Appeals’ decision. “ [Particularly where conduct and not merely speech is involved, we believe that the over- breadth of a statute must not only be real, but substantial as well, judged in relation to the statute’s plainly legitimate sweep.” Broadrick v. Oklahoma, 413 U.S. 601, 615 , 93 S. Ct. 2908, 2918 (1973). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in North Carolina. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
National Ass'n for the Advancement of Colored People v. Claiborne Hardware Co.
green
2 sentences2017The First Amendment "restricts the ability of the State to impose liability on an individual solely because of his association with another." NAACP v. Claiborne Hardware Co. , 458 U.S. 886 , 918-19, 102 S.Ct. 3409 , 73 L.Ed.2d 1215 (1982). 2017The First Amendment "restricts the ability of the State to impose liability on an individual solely because of his association with another." NAACP v. Claiborne Hardware Co. , 458 U.S. 886 , 918-19, 102 S.Ct. 3409 , 73 L.Ed.2d 1215 (1982). | 1 | 2017–2017 |
United States v. O'Brien
green
2 sentences2014O’Brien concerned a man who intentionally and illegally burned his draft card, but did so as a form of protest against the draft. 391 U.S. at 369-70 . 2014O’Brien concerned a man who intentionally and illegally burned his draft card, but did so as a form of protest against the draft. 391 U.S. at 369-70 . | 1 | 2014–2014 |
Cauble v. Cauble
green
2 sentences2007The trial court analyzed the "escalator clause" provisions appropriately under the O'Brien test, noting that: All of the monetary gains the Defendant received from the sale of his interests in the Colby business entities were generated by the Defendant's active employment and performance of services for the Colby business entities and such gains are subject to the escalator provisions of the "Agreement." Since this Court is bound by the trial court's findings where there is competent evidence to support them, Cauble, 133 N.C. 2007The trial court analyzed the "escalator clause" provisions appropriately under the O'Brien test, noting that: All of the monetary gains the Defendant received from the sale of his interests in the Colby business entities were generated by the Defendant's active employment and performance of services for the Colby business entities and such gains are subject to the escalator provisions of the "Agreement." Since this Court is bound by the trial court's findings where there is competent evidence to support them, Cauble, 133 N.C. | 1 | 2007–2007 |
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.