Legal Opinion

Reason v. Singer Sewing MacHine Company

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided April 17, 1963No. 259PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDenny, C.J.

If it be conceded that the machine furnished by the defendant was defective and that the defendant knew or by the exercise of rasonable care such defect could or should have been ascertained, the question still remains whether or not such alleged negligence was the proximate cause of plaintiff’s injuries.

Negligence, in order to be actionable, must be shown to .have been the proximate -cause or one of the proximate causes of the plaintiff’s injuries. There must be some causal relationship between the breach of duty and the injury. Johnson v. Meyer’s Co., 246 N.C. 310, 98 S.E. 2d 315.

In Wall v.…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Hanrahan v. Walgreen CompanySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1955
  2. Wall v. TrogdonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1959
  3. Watson v. Borg-Warner Corp.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1950
  4. Johnson v. Meyer's CompanySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1957
  5. Mauney v. . Luzier's Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1939

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Warren v. ColomboCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1989
  2. Clarke v. HolmanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1968
  3. Ingold v. Carolina Power & Light CompanyCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1971
  4. Hubbard v. Quality Oil Company of Statesville, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1966
  5. McGaha v. Smoky Mountain Stages, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1965

4 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