Scarborough v. Dillard's Inc.
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
WYNN, Judge.
A motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict should be denied if there is more than a scintilla of evidence to support the plaintiffs prima facie case.1 Here, the plaintiff argues the trial court erred in granting the defendant’s motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict as to punitive damages because there was sufficient evidence to support the jury’s punitive damages award. Because we find more than a scintilla of evidence to support the jury’s punitive damages award, we must reverse the trial court’s grant of judgment notwithstanding the verdict as to punitive…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- State v. . LawrenceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1929
- Jones v. GwynneSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1984
- Williams v. Boylan-Pearce, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1984
- Williams v. Boylan-Pearce, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1985
- Miller v. B.H.B. Enterprises, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 2002
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Scarborough v. Dillard's, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 2009
- Kornegay v. Aspen Asset Group, LLCCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2010
- Springs v. City of CharlotteCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2011
- Everhart v. O'CHARLEY'S INC.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 2009
- Austin v. Bald II, L.L.C.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 2008
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.