A landlord (of residential property) in North Carolina has a duty to render the premises safe for the tentants. The extent of that duty is not clear. In a recent case, Davenport v. D.M. Rental Properties, Inc., (November 15, 2011), the plaintiff was a tenant at the defendant's trailer park.
This article addresses the liability of multiple defendants in tort and other liability contexts. It also addresses the rights to contribution and indemnity among the co-defendants. Finally, it addresses the issue of the plaintiff’s or claimant’s own negligence. The author of this Article, John Kirby, has handled hundreds of lawsuits and appeals in North Carolina involving claims for contribution and ...
In Burgess v. Dorton the Court of Appeals (on 1/7/2014; unpublished) addressed a case involving the application of "last clear chance."
On December 4, 2012, the Court of Appeals held that a cadet at the North Carolina State Highway Patrol Basic School could sue two of her trainers for a serious hip injury when she was pushed too far during training.
In an unpublished case decided by the North Carolina Court of Appeals on February 5, 2013, the Court held that an exclusion for injury to a leased employee was not covered under an automobile insurance policy. In this case,
In Brown v. Penn National (MDNC, January 28, 2014), the federal court addressed whether an operator of a vehicle had liability coverage for injuries arising out of her use of a vehicle owned by her husband's employer.
In Montgomery Mutual Ins. v. Citadel Management (November 22, 2013; WDNC) a federal court addressed coverage for and a duty to defend claims for improper burial. In the underlying tort action, the plaintiff alleged that thecemetery mishandled
In Blitz v. Agean, from June 4, 2013, the North Carolina Court of Appeals affirmed the lower court's decision to deny class certification.
On August 7, 2012, the Court of Appeals held that a worker who fell three floors could not sue the company that installed the "nut" that failed, causing his fall, because of the "completed and accepted" doctrine
In Katy v Kapriola, from April 16, 2013, the Court of Appeals ruled that the lower court erred in failing to submit the patient's contributory negligence to a jury, thereby reversing a verdict of $667,000.
