Husketh v. Convenient Systems, Inc.
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
COPELAND, Justice.
The principal issue raised on this appeal is the propriety of the trial court’s grant of a directed verdict against the plaintiff. For the reasons set out below, we have determined that this was error; therefore, the decision of the Court of Appeals must be reversed.
It is elementary that, in considering a defendant’s motion for a directed verdict, the court must view the evidence in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, resolving all conflicts in his favor and giving the plaintiff the benefit of every inference that reasonably can be drawn in his favor. Summey v.…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Dickinson v. PakeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1974
- Rose v. Melody LaneCalifornia Supreme Court · 1952
- Summey v. CauthenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1973
- Springs v. . DollSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1929
- Gow v. Multnomah Hotel, Inc.Oregon Supreme Court · 1951
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by42 opinions
- Nelson v. FreelandSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1998
- Foster v. Winston-Salem Joint VentureSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1981
- Cameron v. New Hanover Memorial Hospital, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1982
- Rappaport v. Days Inn of America, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1979
- Potts v. BurnetteSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1981
37 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.