Scarborough v. Ingram
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtRodman, J.
The first question for determination is the court’s ruling on defendant’s motion for nonsuit. Defendant asserts the refusal to allow his motion is erroneous for two reasons: (1) Plaintiff failed to offer any evidence of negligence proximately causing plaintiff’s injuries, and (2) all the evidence establishes as a matter of law plaintiff’s negligence proximately causing the collision and resulting damage.
Defendant’s evidence suffices to establish these facts: The collision occurred at night in a residential area of a town where the maximum speed limit was 35 m.p.h. Shortly before the collision…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Chaffin v. BrameSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1951
- State v. NorrisSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1955
- Keener v. BealSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1957
- Burchette v. DAVIS DISTRIBUTING COMPANY OF DURHAMSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1955
- Carrigan v. DoverSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1959
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- White v. MoteSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1967
- Melton v. CrottsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1962
- Edwards v. MayesCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1967
- Beasley v. WilliamsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1963
- Correll v. GaskinsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1964
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.