Strickland v. Jacobs
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
EAGLES, Judge.
Defendant first argues that the trial court erred in failing to grant her motion to amend the order for a new trial. She contends that Rule 52(a)(2) of our Rules of Civil Procedure and Andrews v. Peters, 318 N.C. 133, 347 S.E. 2d 409 (1986), required the trial court to make findings of fact showing the grounds upon which it granted the new trial. We disagree. In ruling on a motion for a new trial under Rule 59(a), absent a specific request made pursuant to Rule 52(a)(2), a trial court is not required to either state the reasons for its decision or make findings of fact showing…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Worthington v. BynumSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1982
- Hamlin v. AustinCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1980
- Andrews v. PetersSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1986
- Edge v. Metropolitan Life InsuranceCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1985
3Cited by10 opinions
- Bartlett Milling Co., LP v. Walnut Grove Auction and Realty Co., Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 2008
- Nobles v. First Carolina Communications, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1992
- Spivey & Self, Inc. v. Highview Farms, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1993
- Trent v. River Place, LLCCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2006
- Carlisle v. CSX Transportation, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 2008
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.