Redden v. Bynum
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtMoore, J.
Plaintiff’s sole assignment of error is based on her exception to the allowance of defendants’ motion for involuntary non-suit. As to defendant Bynum the exception is well taken.
When considered in the light most favorable to her, plaintiff’s evidence makes out a prima facie case of actionable negligence against Bynum. It is true that there are discrepancies, contradictions and inconsistencies in plaintiff’s testimony, but upon motion for nonsuit these are resolved in favor of plaintiff. Dinkins v. Carlton, 255 N.C. 137, 141, 120 S.E. 2d 543; Cozart v. Hudson, 239 N.C. 279, 78 S.E. 2d 881.…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Springs v. . DollSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1929
- Mitchell v. . MeltsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1942
- Hoke v. Atlantic Greyhound Corp.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1947
- Cox v. LeeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1949
- Johnson v. HeathSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1954
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Superior Foods, Inc. v. Harris-Teeter Super Markets, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1975
- Smith v. CorsatSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1963
- Hardee v. Charles Worth YorkSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1964
- Forgy v. SchwartzSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1964
- Masciulli v. TuckerCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1986
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.