Langley v. R. J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
HEDRICK, Chief Judge.
Plaintiff argues the trial court erred in granting defendants’ motions for summary judgment. We must first determine plaintiffs relationship to defendant Kane, the general contractor, and defendant Reynolds, the owner of the premises. It is well-settled in this state that a contractor and his employees who go upon the premises of the owner, at the owner’s request, are invitees. Spivey v. Wilcox Company, 264 N.C. 387, 141 S.E. 2d 808 (1965). The owner, therefore, owes a duty of due care under all the circumstances to the contractor and the contractor’s employees. Id. Our…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Deaton v. . Elon CollegeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1946
- Spivey v. Babcock & Wilcox CompanySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1965
- Hill v. SmithCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1978
- Cowan v. Laughridge Construction Co.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1982
- Motyka v. NappierCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1970
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- McCorkle v. North Point Chrysler Jeep, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 2010
- Sexton v. United StatesDistrict Court, E.D. North Carolina · 1991
- Pike v. D.A. Fiore Construction Services, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 2009
- Lopez v. SnowdenCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1989