{
  "id": 4739816,
  "name": "JEAN S. TATUM v. FRANK TATUM",
  "name_abbreviation": "Tatum v. Tatum",
  "decision_date": "1986-10-07",
  "docket_number": "No. 161A86",
  "first_page": "407",
  "last_page": "408",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "318 N.C. 407"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "N.C.",
    "id": 9292,
    "name": "Supreme Court of North Carolina"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 5,
    "name_long": "North Carolina",
    "name": "N.C."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "339 S.E. 2d 817",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 1986,
      "opinion_index": -1
    },
    {
      "cite": "79 N.C. App. 605",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        8522346
      ],
      "year": 1986,
      "opinion_index": -1,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc-app/79/0605-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "275 S.E. 2d 485",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 1981,
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "302 N.C. 332",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8565508
      ],
      "year": 1981,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/302/0332-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 121,
    "char_count": 1338,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.74,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 3.1788719578868883e-07,
      "percentile": 0.8643926730863459
    },
    "sha256": "262c41710113e9ac3f8c1fb2e608dabfd9d4e9a91342edb2afeea8f03aca6063",
    "simhash": "1:ed221c3940214054",
    "word_count": 229
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T18:03:08.889643+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "JEAN S. TATUM v. FRANK TATUM"
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "PER CURIAM.\nPlaintiff 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).\nModified and affirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "PER CURIAM."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Arthur Vann for plaintiff-appellant.",
      "Bryant, Drew & Patterson, P.A., by Victor S. Bryant, Jr., for defendant-appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "JEAN S. TATUM v. FRANK TATUM\nNo. 161A86\n(Filed 7 October 1986)\nRules of Civil Procedure \u00a7 50.4\u2014 motion for judgment n.o.v. \u2014 failure to preserve right\nPlaintiff 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.\nAppeal of right by plaintiff pursuant to N.C.G.S. \u00a7 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.\nArthur Vann for plaintiff-appellant.\nBryant, Drew & Patterson, P.A., by Victor S. Bryant, Jr., for defendant-appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0407-01",
  "first_page_order": 431,
  "last_page_order": 432
}