Brooks v. Francis
Court of Appeals of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
MORRIS, Chief Judge.
Defendants argue, citing the common law, that summary judgment was appropriate in that they owed no duty to repair or warn plaintiff of the defective condition of the steps, and alternatively, that plaintiff was contributorily negligent as a matter of law by using the rear stairs, which she knew to be dangerous. We hold that defendants did indeed bear a duty to repair, but that plaintiff was contributorily negligent as a matter of law, barring recovery.
The rule of caveat emptor has been commonly applied by the courts of this state in the landlord tenant context. Until…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Ballenger v. CrowellCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1978
- Bogle v. Duke Power Co.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1975
- Lenz v. Ridgewood AssociatesCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1981
- Fields v. . OgburnSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1919
- Robinson v. ThomasSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1956
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by22 opinions
- Bolkhir v. North Carolina State UniversitySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1988
- Collingwood v. General Electric Real Estate Equities, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1989
- Miller v. C. W. Myers Trading Post, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1987
- Diorio v. PennyCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1991
- Culler v. HamlettCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2002
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.