Legal Opinion

Dobson v. Honeycutt

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided January 21, 1986No. 8529SC743PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

WELLS, Judge.

Plaintiffs contend that the trial court erred in its instructions to the jury. We agree and award plaintiffs a new trial. Defendants contend the trial court erred in dismissing their counterclaim. We disagree and affirm the trial court’s order.

Plaintiffs’ Appeal

Plaintiffs first assign error to the trial court’s refusal to give a peremptory instruction as to defendant Gloria Honeycutt’s negligence. The requested instruction was as follows: “[W]hen you come to the First Issue, the Court instructs you, that if you find the facts to be as the evidence tends to show, you will answer *712th…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Cutts v. CaseySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1971
  2. Hunt v. Montgomery Ward and Co., Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1980
  3. Chisholm v. HallSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1961
  4. Koonce v. MayCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1982
  5. Terrell v. H & N CHEVROLET COMPANYCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1971

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Oakes v. WootenCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2005
  2. Hinnant v. HollandCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1988
  3. Cooke v. GriggCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1996
  4. Maldjian v. BloomquistCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2020

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API