From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Tatum v. Tatum

Supreme Court of North Carolina
Oct 1, 1986
318 N.C. 407 (N.C. 1986)

Opinion

No. 161A86

Filed 7 October 1986

Rules of Civil Procedure 50.4 — motion for judgment n.o.v. — failure to preserve right Plaintiff failed to preserve her right to move for judgment notwithstanding the verdict where she failed to move for a directed verdict at the close of all the evidence.

APPEAL of right by plaintiff pursuant to N.C.G.S. 7A-30(2) from the decision of a divided panel of the Court of Appeals, 79 N.C. App. 605, 339 S.E.2d 817 (1986), finding no error in a judgment entered by Lee, J., at the 25 March 1985 session of Superior Court, DURHAM County. Heard in the Supreme Court 11 September 1986.

Arthur Vann for plaintiff-appellant.

Bryant, Drew Patterson, P.A., by Victor S. Bryant, Jr., for defendant-appellee.


Plaintiff assigns as error the denial by the trial judge of her motion to set aside the verdict of the jury on the issue of contributory negligence. This motion was in effect a motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict pursuant to Rule 50(b)(1) of the North Carolina Rules of Civil Procedure. Plaintiff failed to move for a directed verdict at the close of all the evidence. Therefore, plaintiff failed to preserve her right to move for judgment notwithstanding the verdict. Graves v. Walston, 302 N.C. 332, 275 S.E.2d 485 (1981).

Modified and affirmed.


Summaries of

Tatum v. Tatum

Supreme Court of North Carolina
Oct 1, 1986
318 N.C. 407 (N.C. 1986)
Case details for

Tatum v. Tatum

Case Details

Full title:JEAN S. TATUM v. FRANK TATUM

Court:Supreme Court of North Carolina

Date published: Oct 1, 1986

Citations

318 N.C. 407 (N.C. 1986)
348 S.E.2d 813

Citing Cases

Word v. Jones

Further, by failing to move for a directed verdict at the close of all the evidence, plaintiff failed to…

Seay v. Snyder

“ ‘If there is more than a scintilla of evidence, contributory negligence is for the jury.’ " Tatum v. Tatum,…