1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. S.E.2d
  4. 245 S.E.2d
  5. 245 S.E.2d 507 (1978)
 

HUSKETH v. CONVENIENT SYSTEMS, INC.

No. 88.

245 S.E.2d 507 (1978)

Lenora HUSKETH, Plaintiff, v. CONVENIENT SYSTEMS, INC., d/b/a Mayberry Ice Cream Shoppe, Defendant and Third-Party Plaintiff, v. FOODCRAFT EQUIPMENT COMPANY, INC., Third-Party Defendant and Fourth-Party Plaintiff, v. L & B PRODUCTS CORPORATION, Fourth-Party Defendant.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

July 14, 1978.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Powe, Porter, Alphin & Whichard, P. A., by Willis P. Whichard and Charles R. Holton, Durham, for plaintiff-appellant.

Haywood, Denny & Miller, by George W. Miller, Jr., Durham, for defendant-appellee.

COPELAND, Justice.

The principal issue raised on this appeal is the propriety of the trial court's grant of a directed verdict against the plaintiff. For the reasons set out below, we have determined that this was error; therefore, the decision of the Court of Appeals must be reversed.

It is elementary that, in considering a defendant's motion for a directed verdict, the court must view the evidence in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, resolving all...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases