#### JEAN S. TATUM v. FRANK TATUM

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 *408Court, 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.

PER CURIAM.

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.