Blake v. City of Concord
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtStacy, C. J.
The following excerpt from the charge constitutes the only exception brought forward and discussed in plaintiff’s brief: “Our court has held in Groome v. Statesville (207 N.C. 538), that if there are two ways'open to a person to use — one safe and the other dangerous — the choice of the dangerous way with knowledge of the danger constitutes contributory negligence, and where a person sui juris, that is, aboye the age of minority, and so on, knows of a dangerous condition and voluntarily goes into the place of danger, he is guilty of contributory negligence which will bar his recovery.”
The…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Powers v. S. Sternberg & Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1938
- Fitzgerald v. Concord.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1905
- Russell v. Town of MonroeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1895
- Watkins v. City of RaleighSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1939
- Ferguson Ex Rel. Ferguson v. City of AshevilleSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1938
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Young v. PriceHawaii Supreme Court · 1963
- Price v. City of MonroeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1951
- McClellan v. City of ConcordCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1972
- Young v. PriceHawaii Supreme Court · 1963