Legal Opinion

Poole v. Copland, Inc.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided February 4, 1997No. COA95-693PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

McGEE, Judge.

Copland argues the trial court erred by: 1) denying Copland’s motions for a directed verdict and judgment notwithstanding the verdict based upon an alleged insufficiency of evidence of causation; 2) failing to properly instruct the jury on the issue of liability regarding intentional infliction of emotional distress; 3) improperly instructing the jury on causation; 4) instructing the jury twice on the issue of damages and submitting separate damages issues to the jury as to each defendant; and 5) denying Copeland’s post-trial motions for a new trial or amendment of the judgment…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Dickens v. PuryearSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1981
  2. Johnson v. Ruark Obstetrics & Gynecology Associates, P.A.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1990
  3. Hogan v. Forsyth Country Club Co.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1986
  4. Pinnix v. . GriffinSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1942
  5. Lockwood v. McCaskillSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1964

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

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Taylor v. MetzgerSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1998
  2. Travis v. Alcon Laboratories, Inc.West Virginia Supreme Court · 1998
  3. McLain v. Taco Bell Corp.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 2000
  4. Watson v. DixonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1998
  5. Johnson v. Piggly Wiggly of Pinetops, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 2003

7 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