Hedrick Ex Rel. Hedrick v. Tigniere
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtLake, J.
The plaintiff, being only 13 years of age at the time of her fall, is presumed to have been incapable of contributory negligence. Hutchens v. Southard, 254 N.C. 428, 119 S.E. 2d 205; Adams v. Board of Education, 248 N.C. 506, 103 S.E. 2d 854. Though this presumption is rebuttable, the burden of rebutting it is upon the defendants. The judgment of nonsuit cannot be sustained upon the ground of contributory negligence by the plaintiff in her undertaking of the “pique turn” upon a dance floor, which appeared to her to be slick and which she was warned was slick, even if we assume that such a…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- Brosnan v. SweetserIndiana Supreme Court · 1891
- Pafford v. . Construction Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1940
- Kalinowski v. Y.W.C.A.Washington Supreme Court · 1943
- Adams Ex Rel. Adams v. State Board of EducationSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1958
- Aaser v. City of CharlotteSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1965
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- Lamm v. Bissette Realty, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1990
- Martishius v. Carolco Studios, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 2002
- Wegner v. Delly-Land Delicatessen, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1967
- Branks v. KernSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1987
- Southern Railway Co. v. ADM Milling Co.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1982
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.