Legal Opinion

Taylor v. . Rierson

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided May 20, 1936PublishedCited by 23 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

DEFENDANT RiERSON’s APPEAL.

Schenck, J.

Assignments of Error Nos. 1, 2, and 3 are directed to the refusal of the court to allow motions for judgment as of nonsuit and for peremptory instruction for the defendant upon the first issue. To sustain these motions the appellant relies principally upon what is said in Springs v. Doll, 197 N. C., 240, where the following language from Huddy on Automobiles is quoted with approval: “The mere fact of the skidding of a car is not of itself such evidence of negligence as to render the owner liable for an injury in consequence thereof.” In the same opinion…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Grand Trunk Railway Co. v. IvesSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
  2. Harton v. . Telephone Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1906
  3. Springs v. . DollSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1929
  4. Baker v. Atlantic Coast Line RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1933
  5. Norfleet v. HallSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1933

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

3Cited by23 opinions

  1. Greene v. Charlotte Chemical Laboratories, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1961
  2. Ingram v. . Smoky Mountain Stages, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1945
  3. Hoke v. Atlantic Greyhound Corp.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1947
  4. Wade Ex Rel. Wade v. Jones Sausage Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1954
  5. York v. YorkSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1938

18 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