Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Morrell v. Hardin Creek, Inc.

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided December 7, 2018No. 318A17Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partJustice Beasley

The majority today holds that an exculpatory clause in a commercial lease absolves the landlord from liability for his improper construction or oversight of construction of improvements pursuant to a lease modification agreement. In doing so, the majority construes the written contract in favor of the drafter, construes an exculpatory clause in favor **689of the party benefiting thereunder, and approves of the grant of summary judgment in a case in which multiple genuine issues of material fact have yet to be determined. For these reasons, I must respectfully dissent in part from the…

2Cases cited28 opinions

  1. Forbis v. NealSupreme Court of North Carolina · 2007
  2. Kessing v. National Mortgage CorporationSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1971
  3. In Re the Will of JonesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 2008
  4. Bolkhir v. North Carolina State UniversitySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1988
  5. Variety Wholesalers, Inc. v. Salem Logistics Traffic Services, LLCSupreme Court of North Carolina · 2012

23 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