Legal Opinion

Jones v. Holt

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided November 2, 1966No. 296PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtLake, J.

A defendant, relying upon contributory negligence for his defense, must allege in his answer facts which, if true, constitute negligence by the plaintiff and must prove the negligence so alleged. G.S. 1-139; Moore v. Hales, 266 N.C. 482, 146 S.E. 2d 385. The burden of proof being upon the defendant, the issue of contributory negligence should not be submitted to the jury if the evidence is not sufficient to support an affirmative finding.

In determining the sufficiency of the evidence to justify the submission of this issue to the jury, we must consider the defendant’s evidence in the light…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Hobbs v. Queen City Coach Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1945
  2. Bruce v. O'Neal Flying Service, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1951
  3. Moore v. HalesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1966
  4. Kennedy v. . SmithSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1946
  5. QUEEN CITY COACH COMPANY v. FultzSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1957

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

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Atkins v. MoyeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1970
  2. Clark v. BodycombeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1976
  3. Watson Seafood & Poultry Co. v. George W. Thomas, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1975
  4. Radford v. NorrisCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1985
  5. Alston v. HerrickCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1985

8 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