Legal Opinion

Johnson v. Metropolitan Life Insurance

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided April 30, 1941PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBaRNHill, J.

A judgment non obstante veredicto, in effect, is nothing-more than a belated judgment on tbe pleadings. Jernigan v. Neighbors, 195 N. C., 231, 141 S. E., 586; Iron Works v. Beaman, 199 N. C., 537, 155 S. E., 166; Little v. Furniture Co., 200 N. C., 731, 158 S. E., 490; Buick Co. v. Rhodes, 215 N. C., 595, 2 S. E., 699.

“At common law a judgment non obstante veredicto could be granted only when tbe plea confessed tbe cause of action and set up matters in avoidance which, if true, were insufficient to constitute either a defense or a bar to tbe action. It was entered only upon tbe application of…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Doster v. . EnglishSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1910
  2. Shives v. Eno Cotton MillsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1909
  3. Jernigan v. . NeighborsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1928
  4. Howell v. . PateSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1921
  5. Newby v. Atlantic Coast Realty Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1920

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Veazey v. City of DurhamSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1950
  2. Erickson v. StarlingSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1952
  3. CRAHANE v. SwanOregon Supreme Court · 1957
  4. George E. Shepard, Jr., Inc. v. Kim, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1981
  5. Wachovia Bank National Ass'n v. Superior Construction Corp.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 2011

3 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