Legal Opinion

Investment Properties of Asheville, Inc. v. Allen

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided June 28, 1972No. 94PublishedCited by 40 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MOORE, Justice.

Defendant Allen first contends the trial court erred in denying her motion for a directed verdict made at the close of all the evidence.

On a motion for a directed verdict by the defendant, the court must consider the evidence in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, and may grant the motion only if, as a matter of law, the evidence is insufficient to justify a verdict for the plaintiff. G.S. 1A-1, Rule 50(a), Rules of Civil Procedure; Adler v. Insurance Co., 280 N.C. 146, 185 S.E. 2d 144 (1971); Kelly v. Harvester Co., 278 N.C. 153, 179 S.E. 2d 396 (1971); 5A Moore’s…

2Cases cited47 opinions

  1. Montgomery Ward & Co. v. DuncanSupreme Court of the United States · 1940
  2. Kelly v. International Harvester CompanySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1971
  3. State v. BentonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1970
  4. Pratt v. BishopSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1962
  5. State v. . LeaSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1932

42 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by40 opinions

  1. Thomas M. McInnis & Associates, Inc. v. HallSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1986
  2. Manganello v. Permastone, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1977
  3. Bryant v. Nationwide Mutual Fire InsuranceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1985
  4. Summey v. CauthenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1973
  5. Penley v. PenleySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1985

35 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API