A motion for JNOV โmust be granted if the evidence when taken in the light most favorable to the non-movant is insufficient as a matter of law to support a verdict in favor of the non-movant.โ Poore v. Swan Quarter Farms, Inc., 94 N.C.App. 530, 532, 380 S.E.2d 577, 578 (1989) (citations omitted), disc. review denied, 326 N.C. 50, 389 S.E.2d 94 (1990). The evidence is sufficient to withstand a motion for JNOV โif there is more than a scintilla of evidence supporting each element of the non-movant's case.โ
A motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict "must be granted if the evidence when taken in the light most favorable to the non-movant is insufficient as a matter of law to support a verdict in favor of the non-movant." Poore v. Swan Quarter Farms, Inc., 94 N.C. App. 530, 532, 380 S.E.2d 577, 578 (1989) (citation omitted), disc. review denied, 326 N.C. 50, 389 S.E.2d 94 (1990). However, the evidence is sufficient to withstand a motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict "if there is more than a scintilla of evidence supporting each element of the non-movant's case."
"The standard for appellate review of a trial court's decision on a motion for directed verdict is the same as the standard of review for a judgment notwithstanding the verdict (JNOV)." Poore v. Swan Quarter Farms, Inc., 94 N.C. App. 530, 532, 380 S.E.2d 577, 578 (citing Colony Assoc. v. Fred L. Clapp Co., 60 N.C. App. 634, 637, 300 S.E.2d 37, 39 (1983)), decision modified on denial of reargument, 95 N.C. App. 449, 382 S.E.2d 835 (1989). "A motion for a directed verdict or a JNOV must be granted if the evidence when taken in the light most favorable to the non-movant is insufficient as a matter of law to support a verdict in favor of the non-movant."
The evidence is sufficient to withstand either motion if there is more than a scintilla of evidence supporting each element of the non-movant's case.Poore v. Swan Quarter Farms, Inc., 94 N.C. App. 530, 532-33, 380 S.E.2d 577, 578 (1989) (internal citations omitted). All conflicts in the evidence must be resolved in the plaintiff's favor, and he must be given the benefit of every reasonable inference that can be drawn in his favor.
Prior to leaving the bank, plaintiff learned that loan volume had not decreased as she had been told; it had actually increased over the past year. Defendant first assigns error to the trial court's denial of its motions for a directed verdict and JNOV. Our standard for reviewing the trial court's ruling on a directed verdict is the same as that for JNOV. Poore v. Swan Quarter Farms, 94 N.C. App. 530, 532, 380 S.E.2d 577, 578, modified on other grounds, 95 N.C. App. 449, 382 S.E.2d 835 (1989), disc. review denied, 326 N.C. 50, 389 S.E.2d 93 (1990). A motion for a directed verdict or a JNOV must be granted if the evidence when taken in the light most favorable to the non-movant is insufficient as a matter of law to support a verdict in favor of the non-movant.
Subsequently, this Court vacated the verdict in favor of plaintiffs and remanded the case for entry of judgment that defendant Swan Quarter Farms, Inc. was the owner of the property in dispute. Poore v. Swan Quarter Farms, Inc., 94 N.C. App. 530, 380 S.E.2d 577, modified, 95 N.C. App. 449, 382 S.E.2d 835 (1989), disc. rev. denied, 326 N.C. 50, 389 S.E.2d 93 (1990). Thereafter plaintiffs moved for summary judgment for the judicial dissolution of defendant Swan Quarter Farms, Inc., which motion was denied.
This may be accomplished by either (1) reliance on the Real Property Marketable Title Act, or (2) utilization of traditional methods of proving title. Heath, 309 N.C. at 488, 308 S.E.2d at 247; Poore v. Swan Quarter Farms, Inc., 94 N.C. App. 530, 533, 380 S.E.2d 577, 578, modified, 95 N.C. App. 449, 382 S.E.2d 835 (1989), disc. review denied, 326 N.C. 50, 389 S.E.2d 93-94 (1990). The latter are set out in the oft-cited case of Mobley v. Griffin, 104 N.C. 112, 10 S.E. 142 (1889), and include adverse possession and the "common source of title" doctrine.
The evidence is sufficient if there is more than a scintilla of evidence supporting each element of the non-movant's case. Poore v. Swan Quarter Farms, Inc., 94 N.C. App. 530, 380 S.E.2d 577, modified on other grounds, 95 N.C. App. 449, 382 S.E.2d 835 (1989), disc. review denied, 326 N.C. 50, 389 S.E.2d 93 (1990). A. Boundary Line
Plaintiff argues if she produces "more than a scintilla of evidence," her claim will survive a motion to dismiss. Poore v. Swan Quarter Farms, 94 N.C. App. 530, 533, 380 S.E.2d 577, 578 (1989), disc. review denied, 326 N.C. 50, 389 S.E.2d 93, 94 (1990). However, defendants' motion is correctly treated as a motion for involuntary dismissal pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. ยง 1A-1, Rule 41(b) (1999).
The issue of adverse possession was raised as an affirmative defense by SQF in its answer to Mr. Poore's complaint in Swan Quarter Farms, 79 N.C. App. at 287, 338 S.E.2d at 818. A final judgment in that action was rendered in Poore v. Swan Quarter Farms, Inc., 94 N.C. App. 530, 380 S.E.2d 577 (1989) in which SQF prevailed. This Court reiterated its determination that SQF held title to the property in fee simple in Swan Quarter Farms, 119 N.C. App. at 550, 459 S.E.2d at 54 (citing Swan Quarter Farms, 111 N.C. App. at 546, 434 S.E.2d at 251 (unpublished)). Accordingly, the trial court did not err in determining that the issue of adverse possession had been "raised and argued" and had been determined by this Court.