Legal Opinion

Honeycutt v. Bess

Court of Appeals of North Carolina

Decided November 20, 1979No. 7919SC241PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ARNOLD, Judge.

Defendants first argue that they were entitled to a directed verdict because plaintiff presented no competent evidence of actionable negligence. It is their opinion that the only evidence of negligence was the testimony of plaintiff and Harry Boone that plaintiff’s truck was stalled in the intersection for some 8 to 10 seconds before it was hit and Boone’s testimony that defendant was speeding, and defendant argues that this testimony is “without probative value.” We are unpersuaded, however, by defendants’ argument that the “physical facts and the immutable laws of physics”…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Exum v. BoylesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1968
  2. Ingram v. . Smoky Mountain Stages, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1945
  3. Wade Ex Rel. Wade v. Jones Sausage Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1954
  4. State v. BeckerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1955
  5. Cockrell v. Cromartie Transport Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1978

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. McFetters v. McFettersCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1990
  2. Wray v. HughesCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1980
  3. Trantham v. Estate of Sorrells Ex Rel. SorrellsCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1996
  4. Jones v. Alamance Board of EducationNorth Carolina Industrial Commission · 1995

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

Powered by the Exa API