Kabatnik v. Westminster Co.
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
HILL, Judge.
Defendant brings forth three assignments of error concerning his motion for directed verdict under Rule 50(a) of the North *760Carolina Rules of Civil Procedure, admissibility of evidence, and instructions to the jury. We have examined each of the assignments and find no basis for reversal.
The first question presented by this appeal is whether the trial court erred in denying defendant’s motion for directed verdict. Defendant contends he was entitled to judgment as a matter of law by reason of plaintiffs failure to prove breach of contract.
The question raised by a directed verdict…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Kelly v. International Harvester CompanySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1971
- Summey v. CauthenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1973
- State v. LeeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1970
- Rappaport v. Days Inn of America, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1979
- Husketh v. Convenient Systems, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1978
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Cananwill, Inc. v. EMAR Group, Inc.District Court, M.D. North Carolina · 1999
- Capps v. BlondeauNorth Carolina Business Court · 2010