Legal Opinion

Smith v. Kilburn

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided February 2, 1972No. 718SC695PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

PARKER, Judge.

Considering the evidence in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, as we must in passing upon the trial court’s ruling on defendant’s motion for a directed verdict, Kelly v. Harvester Co., 278 N.C. 153, 179 S.E. 2d 396, it is our opinion that this case should have been submitted to the jury. Plaintiff was not required to prove all of the acts or omissions which she alleged constituted negligence on the part of defendant; proof of negligence in only one respect was sufficient if it proximately caused the injuries and death of her intestate. Funeral Home v. Pride, 261 N.C.…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Kelly v. International Harvester CompanySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1971
  2. Bowen v. GardnerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1969
  3. Anderson v. WebbSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1966
  4. Alexander Funeral Home, Inc. v. PrideSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1964
  5. Krider v. MartelloSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1960

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Sessoms v. RobersonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1980
  2. Brewer v. MajorsCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1980
  3. Simmons v. WilliamsCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1974
  4. Smith v. KilburnSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1972

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API