Legal Opinion

Hoke v. Atlantic Greyhound Corp.

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided November 20, 1946PublishedCited by 26 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWinborne, J.

The separate appeals of defendants Atlantic Greyhound Corporation and Yates Clyde Farris and of defendant George W. Sharpe are considered together, in view of the fact that they are in the same cause and from the same judgment on verdict finding joint and concurrent actionable negligence of all defendants.

In this connection decision here turns upon these assignments of error r (1) The refusal of the court to grant the motions of the respective defendants for judgment as in case of nonsuit at the close of all the evidence; and (2) a certain portion of the charge.

In the light of the allegations…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Milwaukee & Saint Paul Railway Co. v. KelloggSupreme Court of the United States · 1877
  2. Conley Ex Rel. Conley v. Pearce-Young-Angel Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1944
  3. Tysinger v. Coble Dairy ProductsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1945
  4. Taylor v. . StewartSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1916
  5. Kolman v. . SilbertSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1941

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by26 opinions

  1. Mundy v. Pirie-Slaughter Motor Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1948
  2. Aldridge Ex Rel. Aldridge v. HastySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1954
  3. Steelman v. . BenfieldSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1948
  4. Watters Ex Rel. Watters v. ParrishSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1960
  5. Cox v. LeeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1949

21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API