Legal Opinion

Collier v. Welker

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided October 24, 1973No. 7318SC248PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

VAUGHN, Judge.

Defendants’ motions for a directed verdict at the close of plaintiffs’ evidence and at the close of all the evidence and their motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict were denied. The question presented by defendants’ motions for directed verdict is whether the evidence, when considered in the light most favorable to plaintiff, is sufficient for submission to the jury. This is substantially the same question formerly presented by a motion for nonsuit. Kelly v. Harvester Co., 278 N.C. 153, 179 S.E. 2d 396. Although defendants failed to specifically designate the…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Kelly v. International Harvester CompanySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1971
  2. Locklear v. . SavageSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1912
  3. Dobbins v. Dobbins.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1906
  4. Morehead v. HarrisSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1964
  5. Page v. . BranchSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1887

13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. In Re Estate of NeilSupreme Court of Vermont · 1989
  2. Town of Winton v. ScottCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1986
  3. Atl. Coast Props., Inc. v. SaundersCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2015
  4. Sheets v. SheetsCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1982
  5. Hi-Fort, Inc. v. BurnetteCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1979

8 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