Legal Opinion

McFalls v. Smith

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided October 29, 1958No. 311PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHiggins, J.

The only question presented by the appeal is the sufficiency of the evidence to go to the jury. The question is one of law, always to be decided by the court. Ward v. Smith, 223 N.C. 141, 25

5.E. 2d 463. If the evidence in the light most favorable -to the plaintiff, giving him the benefit of all permissible inferences from it, tends to support all essential elements of actionable negligence, then it is sufficient to survive the motion to nonsuit, or demurrer to the evidence. Chambers v. Edney, 247 N.C. 165, 100 S.E. 2d 343; High v. R.R., 248 N.C. 414, 103 S.E. 2d 498; Simmons v. Rogers, 247…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Ward v. . SmithSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1943
  2. Simmons v. RogersSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1957
  3. Chambers v. EdneySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1957
  4. High v. ATLANTIC COAST LINE RAILROAD COMPANYSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1958

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Hood v. Queen City Coach CompanySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1959
  2. Lane v. DorneySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1960
  3. Williams v. BoulericeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1966
  4. Brinson Ex Rel. Brinson v. MabrySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1959
  5. Lake v. HARRIS EXPRESS, INCORPORATEDSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1959

7 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