Barefoot v. Holmes

147 S.E.2d 883, 267 N.C. 242, 1966 N.C. LEXIS 1018
CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina
DecidedMay 4, 1966
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 147 S.E.2d 883 (Barefoot v. Holmes) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of North Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Barefoot v. Holmes, 147 S.E.2d 883, 267 N.C. 242, 1966 N.C. LEXIS 1018 (N.C. 1966).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The appellant assigns as error the ruling of the court below in sustaining the defendants’ motion for judgment as of nonsuit.

In our opinion, when the plaintiff’s evidence is considered in the light most favorable to plaintiff, as it must be on a motion for judgment as of nonsuit, it is sufficient to take the case to the jury, and we so hold. Bridges v. Graham, 246 N.C. 371, 98 S.E. 2d 492; Thomas v. Morgan, 262 N.C. 292, 136 S.E. 2d 700; Randall v. Rogers, 262 N.C. 544, 138 S.E. 2d 248. See also Lane v. Dorney, 252 N.C. 90, 113 S.E. 2d 33.

In accord with the policy of this Court, since there must be a new trial we will not discuss or attempt to analyze the evidence. The judgment of the court below is

Reversed.

Moore, J., not sitting.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Greene v. Nichols
161 S.E.2d 521 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1968)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
147 S.E.2d 883, 267 N.C. 242, 1966 N.C. LEXIS 1018, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/barefoot-v-holmes-nc-1966.