All opinions are subject to modification and technical correction prior to official publication in the North Carolina Reports and North Car olina Court of Appeals Reports. In the event of discrepancies between the electronic version of an opinion and the print version appearing in the North Carolina Reports and North Carolina Court of Appeals Reports, the latest print version is to be consid ered authoritative.
CHAPEL HILL CINEMAS, INC., a North Carolina Corporation v.
CECIL W. ROBBINS and FAYE ELOISE ROBBINS
Landlord and Tenant--breach of lease--increased rental costs--
mitigation of damages--jury question
The decision of the Court of Appeals in this action by
plaintiff lessee to recover damages for defendant lessor's breach
of a notification of sale and right of first refusal provision of
a lease is reversed for the reasons stated in the dissenting
opinion in the Court of Appeals that the trial court erred in
granting a directed verdict in favor of plaintiff for $159,600 in
damages for increased rental costs because the jury was entitled
to determine whether plaintiff exercised reasonable diligence to
mitigate its damages for increased rental payments, and that this
issue was properly preserved for appellate review.
Appeal pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 7A-30(2) from the decision of
a divided panel of the Court of Appeals, 143 N.C. App. 571, 547
S.E.2d 462 (2001), finding no error in part and ordering a new
trial in part of an order granting directed verdict and a
judgment entered 26 July 1999 by Mills, J., in Superior Court,
Orange County. Heard in the Supreme Court 15 October 2001.
Brooks, Pierce, McLendon, Humphrey & Leonard, L.L.P., by
Reid L. Phillips and Jennifer T. Harrod, for plaintiff-
appellees.
Eisele, Ashburn, Greene & Chapman, P.A., by Douglas G.
Eisele; and Levine & Stewart, by John T. Stewart, for
defendant-appellants.
PER CURIAM.
The decision of the Court of Appeals is reversed for the
reasons stated in the dissenting opinion of Judge Tyson.
REVERSED.
*** Converted from WordPerfect ***