Legal Opinion

Peal ex rel. Peal v. Smith

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided June 21, 1994No. 922SC272PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ORR, Judge.

The defendants first argue that the trial court committed reversible error in denying their motions for directed verdict, judgment notwithstanding the verdict, and new trial. The basis for this argument and the authority cited therein in the defendants’ brief rests exclusively on the Court of Appeals opinion in Hart v. Ivey, 102 N.C. App. 583, 403 S.E.2d 914 (1991), modified and affirmed, 332 N.C. 299, 420 S.E.2d 174 (1992), and the cases cited therein as well as Chastain v. Litton Systems, 694 F. 2d 957 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 462 U.S. 1106, 77 L. Ed. 2d 1334 (1983). All of the…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Braswell v. BraswellSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1991
  2. Hart v. IveySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1992
  3. Blanton v. Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1987
  4. Robinson v. Seaboard System RR, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1987
  5. Goodman v. Wenco Foods, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1992

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. PEAL BY PEAL v. SmithCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1994
  2. Heidi Schuyleman v. Brian Jeffrey SmithCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2019

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

Powered by the Exa API