Legal Opinion

American Home Products Corp. v. Howell's Motor Freight, Inc.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided April 15, 1980No. 7926SC762PublishedCited by 18 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

WELLS, Judge.

In its first assignment of error, defendant argues that the trial court erred in denying its motion for a directed verdict at close of plaintiff’s evidence under G.S. 1A-1, Rule 50(a). This assignment must be overruled. On a motion for directed verdict at the close of the plaintiff’s evidence in a jury case, the evidence must be taken as true and considered in the light most favorable to plaintiff, and the motion may be granted only if, as a matter of law, the evidence is insufficient to justify a verdict for the plaintiff. Dickinson v. Pake, 284 N.C. 576, 201 S.E. 2d 897 (1974).…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Dickinson v. PakeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1974
  2. Bowen v. GardnerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1969
  3. United States v. Mississippi Valley Barge Line Company, Mississippi Valley Barge Line Company v. United States Fo AmericaCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1960
  4. Nytco Leasing, Inc. v. Southeastern Motels, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1979
  5. Jenkins v. STARRETT CORPORATIONCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1972

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

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. Overstreet v. Brookland, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1981
  2. Koonce v. MayCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1982
  3. James v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of EducationCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1983
  4. Tice v. HallCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1983
  5. John D. Latimer & Associates, Inc. v. Housing Authority of the City of DurhamCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1982

13 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