Legal Opinion

Hawks v. Brindle

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided March 3, 1981No. 8017DC569PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

CLARK, Judge.

Plaintiffs assign as error the trial court’s granting of a directed verdict for defendants at the close of plaintiffs’ evidence on the issue of fraud. A motion for directed verdict raises the question of whether the non-movant has produced enough evidence to go to the jury. The non-movant’s evidence must be taken as true and considered in the light most favorable to him, and a directed verdict may be properly granted only if, as a matter of law, the evidence is insufficient to justify a verdict for the non-movant. See W. Shuford, N.C. Civ. Prac. & Proc. § 50-5 (1975) and cases…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Ragsdale v. KennedySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1974
  2. Kutz v. McCuneWisconsin Supreme Court · 1868
  3. Insurance Co. v. . Guilford CountySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1945
  4. Johnson v. StevensonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1967
  5. Tise v. . Whitaker-Harvey Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1907

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

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Collins v. DavisCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1984
  2. Mitchell, Brewer, Richardson, Adams, Burge & Boughman, PLLC v. BrewerCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2011
  3. Jolley v. General Motors Corp.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1982
  4. Myers v. Catoe Construction Co.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1986
  5. Governor's Island v. Eways (In Re Governor's Island)United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. North Carolina · 1984

9 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