Legal Opinion

Greensboro Masonic Temple v. McMillan

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided March 6, 2001No. COA00-311PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

WYNN, Judge.

A Rule 41(b) motion “not only tests the sufficiency of plaintiff’s proof to show a right to relief, but also provides a procedure whereby the judge may weigh the evidence, determine the facts, and render judgment on the merits against the plaintiff.” McKnight v. Cagle, 76 N.C. App. 59, 65, 331 S.E.2d 707, 711, cert. denied, 314 N.C. 541, 335 S.E.2d 20 (1985). The plaintiff in this case argues that the dismissal of its case under Rule 41(b) was improper because it presented sufficient proof to support its breach of contract claim. Because the transcript in this matter supports the…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Helms v. ReaSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1973
  2. Millis Construction Co. v. Fairfield Sapphire Valley, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1987
  3. Dealers Specialties, Inc. v. Neighborhood Housing Services, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1982
  4. Iron Steamer, Ltd. v. Trinity Restaurant, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1993
  5. Neasham v. DayCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1977

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Maynard v. CrookCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2023

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API