Young v. Stewart
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
WELLS, Judge.
In their first assignment of error, plaintiffs contend the trial court erred in finding plaintiff Ursula Young’s lost earning capacity evidence insufficient to go to the jury and that the verdict was not supported by the evidence and contrary to law. Defendants contend the order from which plaintiffs appeal is discretionary and is subject to review only for abuse of discretion. However, the decision is reviewable where the trial judge grants or refuses to grant a new trial based on some question of law or legal inference which the judge decides. Hunnicutt v. Griffin, 76 N.C. App.…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Smith v. CorsatSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1963
- Rolling Fashion Mart, Inc. v. MainorCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1986
- Smith v. PassCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1989
- Thomas v. Union Railway Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1897
- Faber v. Gimbel Bros.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1919
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Overstreet v. Shoney's, Inc.Court of Appeals of Tennessee · 1999
- Behrens v. Metropolitan Opera Ass'nAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2005
- Corbett v. SeamonsCourt of Appeals of Utah · 1995
- Sarah Beth Clingan Overstreet v. Shoney's, Inc.Court of Appeals of Tennessee · 1994