Legal Opinion

Cohee v. Sligh

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided April 10, 1963No. 378PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Per curiam

If the owner of an automobile is to be held liable for the manner in which it is operated, he must be charged with responsibility for the operation — 'mere ownership is not sufficient. Responsibility may be imposed because of the personal negligence of the owner or because the owner acts through an agent or under the “family purpose doctrine.” Lynn v. Clark, 252 N.C. 289, 113 S.E. 2d 427; Parker v. Underwood, 239 N.C. 308, 79 S.E. 2d 765.

A complaint which fails to state a cause of action is not sufficient to support a judgment for plaintiff. Morton v. Insurance Co., 255 N.C. 360, 121 S.E. 2d…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Lynn v. ClarkSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1960
  2. Parker v. UnderwoodSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1954
  3. Pruitt v. TaylorSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1957
  4. Collins v. SimmsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1961
  5. Morton v. BLUE RIDGE INSURANCE COMPANYSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1961

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Jackson v. MauneySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1963
  2. Lowe's of Raleigh, Inc. v. WorldsCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1969
  3. Belmany v. OvertonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1967
  4. American Credit Co. v. Stuyvesant Insurance Co.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1970

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

Powered by the Exa API