Boykin v. WILSON MEDICAL CENTER
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
STEELMAN, Judge.
Where the trial court granted Plaintiffs motion for a new trial pursuant to Rule 59(a)(9) of the North Carolina Rules of Civil Procedure based upon juror and counsel fatigue, we discern no abuse of discretion. The failure of Plaintiff to object to the trial court’s schedule did not prohibit the trial court from considering the schedule in determining whether a new trial should be awarded under Rule 59(a)(9). Where the trial court unilaterally imposed a harsh trial schedule upon the parties, the concept of invited error is not applicable.
I. Procedural Background
On 11 August…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Worthington v. BynumSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1982
- In Re the Will of BuckSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1999
- Frugard v. PritchardSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1994
- Settee v. Charlotte Electric Railway Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1915
- Selph v. SelphSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1966
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Peltzer v. PeltzerCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2012
- SPX Corp. v. Liberty Mutual InsuranceCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2011
- Potts v. Kel, LLCNorth Carolina Business Court · 2021
- B.C. v. Palmetto Wellness Grp. N.C.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 2025
- Boykin v. WILSON MEDICAL CENTERSupreme Court of North Carolina · 2010
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.