Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Hyatt v. Mini Storage on the Green

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

September 16, 2014

DAVID HYATT, Plaintiff
v.
MINI STORAGE ON THE GREEN, DAVID B. SMITH, AND NCI GROUP, INC. D/B/A DOORS AND BUILDING COMPONENTS (DBCI), Defendants; DAVID B. SMITH, Third-Party Plaintiff
v.
THE ESTATE OF JOHN ALVIN ROYALL, ROYALL COMMERCIAL CONTRACTORS, INC. and E& S STEEL, INC., Third-Party Defendants

Heard in the Court of Appeals June 5, 2014.

Pender County. No. 09 CVS 1320.

David & Associates, P.L.L.C., by Stuart Smith; Hodges & Coxe P.C., by Bradley A. Coxe, for Plaintiff.

Hedrick, Gardner, Kincheloe & Garofalo, L.L.P., by Ellen P. Wortman, for Defendant Mini Storage on the Green.

Wallace, Morris, Barwick, Landis & Stroud, P.A., by P.C. Barwick, Jr., Stuart L. Stroud, and Donald K. Phillips, for Third-Party Plaintiff David B. Smith.

ERVIN, Judge. Judge ROBERT N. HUNTER, JR. concurred in this opinion prior to 6 September 2014. Judge DAVIS concurs.

OPINION

Page 167

ERVIN, Judge.

Appeal by plaintiff from orders entered 18 July 2013 and 21 August 2013 by Judge W. Allen Cobb, Jr., in Pender County Superior Court.

Page 168

Plaintiff David Hyatt appeals from an order entered 18 July 2013 granting summary judgment in favor of Defendant Mini Storage on the Green and from an order entered 19 August 2013 granting summary judgment in favor of Defendant and Third-Party Plaintiff David B. Smith. On appeal, Plaintiff argues that the trial court erred by granting summary judgment in favor of Defendant Mini Storage because it breached a duty to provide renters with safe storage units and because the rental agreement between Plaintiff and Defendant Mini Storage fails to exculpate Defendant from liability for failing to provide safe storage units. In addition, Plaintiff argues that the trial court erred by granting summary judgment in favor of Defendant Smith because any assignment of the contract between Defendant Smith and Defendant Mini Storage did not relieve Defendant Smith of liability and because the completed and accepted work doctrine did not apply to the work that Defendant Smith performed on the storage units. After careful consideration of Plaintiff's challenges to the trial court's orders in light of the record and the applicable law, we conclude that the trial court's orders should be affirmed.

I. Factual Background

A. Substantive Facts

1. Liability of Defendant Mini ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.