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 1915–2007 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 |
|---|---|---|
In re B.P.green1 sentence2007See In re B.P., 169 N.C. | 1 | 1 |
Murray v. Nationwide Mutual Insurancegreen2 sentences1998General Statute § 58-63-15(ll)i. (1994) states that to attempt “to settle claims on the basis of an application which was altered without notice to, or knowledge or consent of, the insured” is an unfair claim settlement practice when “committ[ed] or performed] with such frequency as to indicate a general business practice.” Case law has further required that for a plaintiff to prevail on a claim for unfair or deceptive trade practices, plaintiff must demonstrate the existence of three factors: “(1) an unfair or deceptive act or practice, or unfair method of competition, (2) in or affecting com 1998App. at 9 , 472 S.E.2d at 362 (citations omitted). | 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 |
|---|---|---|
Nelson v. Hartford Underwriters Insurance
green
1 sentence2007App. at 608, 630 S.E.2d at 231 (quoting Gray v. N.C. | 1 | 2007–2007 |
Gray v. North Carolina Insurance Underwriting
green
2 sentences2006Gray, 352 N.C. at 71 , 529 S.E.2d at 683 . 2006Gray, 352 N.C. at 71 , 529 S.E.2d at 683 . | 1 | 2006–2006 |
Lovell v. Nationwide Mutual Insurance
green
1 sentence1999Lovell, 108 N.C. | 1 | 1999–1999 |
Hoag v. . Wright
green
2 sentences1915I think the question is distinguishable, upon the facts, from that passed upon in Hoag v. Wright, 174 N. Y., 36 .” The case of Hoag v. Wright, supra, was distinguished from People v. Patrick because in the former the witness was an acknowledged expert in handwriting, and we suppose was, therefore, thought to be able to take care of himself, and to be better acquainted with the “tricks of the trade.” The law is well stated in Andrews v. Hayden's Admr., 88 Ky., 455 , 459: “The admissions of these spurious signatures, prepared by an experienced expert, for the purpose of being presented to the wi 1915I think the question is distinguishable, upon the facts, from that passed upon in Hoag v. Wright, 174 N. Y., 36 .” The case of Hoag v. Wright, supra, was distinguished from People v. Patrick because in the former the witness was an acknowledged expert in handwriting, and we suppose was, therefore, thought to be able to take care of himself, and to be better acquainted with the “tricks of the trade.” The law is well stated in Andrews v. Hayden's Admr., 88 Ky., 455 , 459: “The admissions of these spurious signatures, prepared by an experienced expert, for the purpose of being presented to the wi | 1 | 1915–1915 |
Andrews v. Hayden's Adm'r
neutral
1 sentence1915I think the question is distinguishable, upon the facts, from that passed upon in Hoag v. Wright, 174 N. Y., 36 .” The case of Hoag v. Wright, supra, was distinguished from People v. Patrick because in the former the witness was an acknowledged expert in handwriting, and we suppose was, therefore, thought to be able to take care of himself, and to be better acquainted with the “tricks of the trade.” The law is well stated in Andrews v. Hayden's Admr., 88 Ky., 455 , 459: “The admissions of these spurious signatures, prepared by an experienced expert, for the purpose of being presented to the wi | 1 | 1915–1915 |
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.