Farmer v. Chaney
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
HUSKINS, Justice.
Defendants moved for a directed verdict at the close of plaintiff’s evidence. The motion was allowed, and plaintiff’s sole assignment of error is addressed to the propriety of that ruling.
On motion by a defendant for a directed verdict at close of plaintiff’s evidence in a jury case, as here, the evidence must be taken as true and considered in the light most favorable to plaintiff. When so considered, the motion should be allowed if, as a matter of law, the evidence is insufficient to justify a verdict for the plaintiff. G.S. 1A-1, Rule 50(a), Rules of Civil Procedure;…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Kelly v. International Harvester CompanySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1971
- Investment Properties of Asheville, Inc. v. AllenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1972
- Investment Properties of Asheville, Inc. v. AllenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1973
- Adler v. Lumber Mutual Fire Insurance CompanySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1971
- Hardee v. Charles Worth YorkSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1964
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by25 opinions
- Bryant v. Nationwide Mutual Fire InsuranceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1985
- Penley v. PenleySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1985
- Boyd v. DrumCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1998
- Siders v. GibbsCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1978
- Ridenhour v. International Business MacHines Corp.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1999
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.