Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Smith v. Winn-Dixie Charlotte, Inc.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided February 20, 2001No. COA00-284Published

1ConcurrenceTyson, Judge

I concur in the result of the majority. However, I disagree with the majority’s statement that the evidence “is sufficient to show that Winn-Dixie knew or should have known that Schewzyk was going to drive a motor vehicle, as a reasonable person could find that someone who travels to and from a grocery store does so by driving a motor vehicle.”

There is evidence that Schewzyk did not drive a motor vehicle from the Winn-Dixie after purchasing alcohol. Schewzyk testified in his deposition that he was a passenger in another driver’s car at all relevant times. I cannot agree with a per se rule…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Penland v. GreeneSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1976
  2. Wrenn v. WatersSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1970

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

Powered by the Exa API