Legal Opinion

Bailey v. LeBeau

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided February 18, 1986No. 8518DC813PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

HEDRICK, Chief Judge.

To prevent a manifest injustice, we, ex mero motu, suspend the rules of appellate procedure to review all aspects of this case and reverse portions of the judgment and remand the case for a new trial on plaintiffs claim for breach of express warranty. Rule 2, N.C. Rules of Appellate Procedure.

Defendants first contend that the evidence in this record is insufficient to support a finding that defendant Pioneer Coach made any warranty to plaintiff. We disagree. The evidence in the record tends to show that Pioneer Coach advertised the sale of the automobile in a magazine…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Ellis v. Smith-Broadhurst, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1980
  2. Pake v. ByrdCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1982
  3. Hunsucker v. CorbittSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1924
  4. Williams v. Hyatt Chrysler-Plymouth, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1980
  5. Vickery v. OLIN HILL CONST. CO., INC.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1980

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

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Mosley & Mosley Builders, Inc. v. Landin Ltd.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1990
  2. Hageman v. Twin City Chrysler-Plymouth Inc.District Court, M.D. North Carolina · 1988
  3. Allen v. SimmonsCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1990
  4. Prichard Enterprises, Inc. v. AdkinsDistrict Court, E.D. North Carolina · 2012
  5. Anders v. Hyundai Motor America Corp.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1991

8 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