Tan v. Tan
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
HEDRICK, Judge.
By his second, sixth, and eighteenth assignments of error, defendant contends the court erred in denying his motions for a directed verdict pursuant to G.S. § 1A-1, Rule 50 and in thereaf ter submitting the issue of abandonment to the jury. We disagree. We first note that we need not consider defendant’s motion for a directed verdict at the close of plaintiffs evidence, as defendant chose thereafter to present evidence in his favor. See Hodges v. Hodges, 37 N.C. App. 459, 246 S.E. 2d 812 (1978). In considering defendant’s other motions for a directed verdict, the evidence is to…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Snow v. Duke Power Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1979
- Panhorst v. PanhorstSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1971
- Powell v. PowellCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1975
- State v. FreemanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1978
- Murray v. MurraySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1979
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Marina Food Associates, Inc. v. Marina Restaurant, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1990
- Rowan County Board of Education v. United States Gypsum Co.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1991
- Morrison v. StallworthCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1985
- Patton v. PattonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1985
- Whedon v. WhedonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1982
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.