Penny v. Seaboard Coast Line Railroad
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
BRITT, Judge.
In its first assignment of error, defendant contends that the trial court erred in refusing to grant defendant’s motion for a directed verdict at the close of all the evidence and in refusing to grant defendant’s motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict or its alternative motion for a new trial for the reason that the evidence offered by plaintiff was not sufficient to be submitted to the jury on the question of defendant’s negligence. Suffice to say, we think plaintiff’s evidence of defendant’s negligence when considered in the light most favorable to him was sufficient…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- In Re Will of AtkinsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1945
- Cox v. GallamoreSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1966
- Brown v. Atlantic Coast Line Railroad CompanySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1970
- May v. SOUTHERN RAILWAY COMPANYSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1963
- Piedmont Supply Co. v. RozzellSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1952
3Cited by2 opinions
- Clark v. BarberCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1974
- Mansfield v. AndersonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1979