Legal Opinion · Dissent

Franco v. Liposcience, Inc.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided May 19, 2009No. COA08-785Published

1DissentErvin, Judge

Although I fully concur in the Court’s conclusion that the trial court properly denied Plaintiff’s recusal motion, I respectfully dissent from my colleagues’ determination that the trial court correctly granted a directed verdict in favor of Defendant at the close of all of the evidence. As a result, I believe that the trial court’s judgment should be reversed and that this matter should be remanded for a new trial.

A trial court evaluating a dismissal motion under N.C. Gen. Stat. § 1A-1, Rule 50(a), must view the evidence in the light most favorable to the non-moving party and give that party…

2Cases cited38 opinions

  1. Coman v. Thomas Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1989
  2. Brenner v. Little Red School House, Ltd.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1981
  3. Kurtzman v. Applied Analytical Industries, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1997
  4. Still v. LanceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1971
  5. State Ex Rel. Dunlap v. BergerWest Virginia Supreme Court · 2002

33 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