Williams v. Sapp
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
HEDRICK, Chief Judge.
Defendants contend that the trial court erred in allowing plaintiffs motion to amend her complaint to allege that she was entitled to an easement by implication and in denying their motions for directed verdict and to dismiss on the issue of easement by implication. Defendants argue that they were prejudiced by the amendment because it was made late in the trial. Plaintiff made the motion to amend her complaint pursuant to G.S. 1A-1, Rule 15(b). The trial judge has broad discretion in ruling on such motions. Auman v. Easter, 36 N.C. App. 551, 244 S.E. 2d 728, disc. rev.…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- State v. SmithSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1985
- State v. LedfordSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1986
- Potts v. BurnetteSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1981
- Auman v. EasterCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1978
- Board of Transportation v. BryantCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1982
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Smith v. ChildsCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1993
- Hajmm Co. v. House of Raeford Farms, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1989
- Hummer v. Pulley, Watson, King & Lischer, P.A.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 2003
- CAPE FEAR PUBLIC UTILITY AUTHORITY v. CostaCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2010
- Praxair, Inc. v. Airgas, Inc.North Carolina Business Court · 2000
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.