Clark v. . Sweaney
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Appeal by plaintiff from Bond, J., at June Term, 1918, of Durham:. ' This is an action for damages from being run into and knocked down by defendant’s automobile while attempting to cross Main Street near the business center of Durham.
Read the full summary
Appeal by plaintiff from Bond, J., at June Term, 1918, of Durham:. ' This is an action for damages from being run into and knocked down by defendant’s automobile while attempting to cross Main Street near the business center of Durham. At the close of the evidence for defendant the court stated that it would charge the jury that if they believed the evidence and found the facts to be as they tended to show, the jury would answer the first issue “No.” In deference to this intimation, the plaintiff submitted to a judgment of nonsuit and appealed.
1Opinion of the CourtClakk, C. J.
This case was before us on appeal from a nonsuit at close of plaintiff’s evidence, which the Court reversed, 175 N. C., 280. On the second trial the evidence for the plaintiff was substantially the same and, in compliance with our former ruling, the case should have been submitted to the jury. On a motion for nonsuit, the evidence for the defendant could not take from the plaintiff this right, for the evidence must be taken in the light most favorable to him; in fact, there is in the evidence for the defendant something that strengthens the testimony for the plaintiff which alone was heard on…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Linville v. . NissenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1913
- Clark v. . SweaneySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1918
3Cited by26 opinions
- Martin v. Greensboro-Fayetteville Bus LineSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1929
- Thompson v. LassiterSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1957
- Robertson ex rel. King v. AldridgeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1923
- Maddox v. BrownSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1951
- Allen v. . GaribaldiSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1924
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.