Legal Opinion

Britt v. Allen

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided August 29, 1978No. 7719SC869PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

PARKER, Judge.

Plaintiffs contend it was error for the superior court to dismiss their action because our Supreme Court had directed that the case “be remanded to the superior court for a trial de novo.” Britt v. Allen, 291 N.C. at 639, 231 S.E. 2d at 614. In making this contention, plaintiffs mistake the import of the Supreme Court’s directive. That directive did not render the Rules of Civil Procedure inapplicable to the further proceedings in this case. For plaintiffs to be entitled to a jury trial, it was still necessary that their action be sufficient to withstand defendant’s motions for…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Carr v. Good Shepherd Home, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1967
  2. Britt v. AllenCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1971
  3. Charles S. Riley & Co. v. W. T. Sears & Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1911
  4. Henry v. ShoreCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1973
  5. Howe v. Hall.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1901

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Burgess v. VestalCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1990
  2. Metts v. PiverCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1991
  3. Metts v. PiverCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1991

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

Powered by the Exa API