Cantey v. Barnes
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
BECTON, Judge.
The defendant first argues that the court should have granted a directed verdict in her favor because the plaintiff “failed to show actionable negligence on the part of the defendant and has shown contributory negligence barring her recovery.” We disagree. A directed verdict should be granted only if the evidence is insufficient, as a matter of law, to support a verdict for the plaintiff. Husketh v. Convenient Systems, 295 N.C. 459, 245 S.E. 2d 507 (1978); Dickinson v. Poke, 284 N.C. 576, 201 S.E. 2d 897 (1974). “[I]n considering a defendant’s motion for a directed verdict, the…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Dickinson v. PakeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1974
- Rappaport v. Days Inn of America, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1979
- Gregory v. LynchSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1967
- Husketh v. Convenient Systems, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1978
- Jones v. SATTERFIELD DEVELOPMENT COMPANYCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1972
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Ferguson v. WilliamsCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1991
- Blevins v. TaylorCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1991