Mizell v. K-Mart Corp.
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
EAGLES, Judge.
Plaintiff contends that the trial court erred in granting defendant’s motion for summary judgment. Plaintiff argues that a genuine issue of material fact exists as to whether the liquid remained on the floor for such a length of time that defendant knew or should have known of its existence. We agree.
Under G.S. 1A-1, Rule 56(c), defendant is entitled to summary judgment if the record shows “that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that [defendant] is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law.” Defendant, as the party moving for summary judgment, has the burden…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Kessing v. National Mortgage CorporationSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1971
- Moore v. Fieldcrest Mills, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1979
- Norwood v. Sherwin-Williams Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1981
- Lamm v. Bissette Realty, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1990
- Hotel Corp. v. Taylor and Fletcher v. Foremans, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1980
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Furr v. K-Mart Corp.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 2001
- Carter v. Food Lion, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1997
- Thompson v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 2000
- State of North Carolina Gaston County Estate of Jiggetts Ex Rel. Jiggetts v. City of GastoniaCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1998
- Mizell v. K-Mart Corp.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1991