Legal Opinion

Durham v. Creech

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided January 5, 1977No. 7611SC605PublishedCited by 21 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ARNOLD, Judge.

Plaintiffs assign error to the directed verdict in favor of defendants. Defendants’ motion for directed verdict measures the sufficiency of the evidence according to this test: is the evidence, when considered in the light most favorable to plaintiffs, sufficient as a matter of law to support a jury verdict in plaintiffs’ favor. If it is, the jury must be given the evidence for its consideration and decision. If it is not, the court must enter a directed verdict. Summey v. Cauthen, 283 N.C. 640, 197 S.E. 2d 549 (1973); American Personnel, Inc. v. Harbolick, 16 N.C. App. 107, 191…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Summey v. CauthenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1973
  2. Cofield v. GriffinSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1953
  3. Morehead v. HarrisSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1964
  4. Archer v. McClureSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1914
  5. Parker v. PittmanCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1973

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

3Cited by21 opinions

  1. Cunningham v. BrownCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1981
  2. Buchanan v. BuchananCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1986
  3. Smith v. First Choice ServicesCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2003
  4. Light v. Equitable Life Assurance Society of the United StatesCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1982
  5. Nelson v. HarrisCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1977

16 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