Hood v. Queen City Coach Company
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtHiggiNS, J.
Appellant’s assignments of error present these questions of law: (1) Is the evidence sufficient to support the issue of negligence? (2) Does contributory negligence appear from the evidence as a matter of law? (3) Does reversible error appear in the challenged portions of the court’s charge?
The plaintiff was entitled to have the issue of negligence submitted to the jury if his evidence and the legitimate inferences from it tended to show the defendant breached a legal duty which it owed to him, and that the breach of, or failure to perform, that duty proximately caused his injury. McFalls v.…
2Cases cited26 opinions
- State v. NorrisSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1955
- Wagoner v. North Carolina RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1953
- Keener v. BealSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1957
- Brigman v. . Construction Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1926
- Porchey v. KellingSupreme Court of Missouri · 1945
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by29 opinions
- Rappaport v. Days Inn of America, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1979
- Anderson Ex Rel. Anderson v. ButlerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1974
- Hoots v. PryorCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1992
- Newton v. New Hanover County Board of EducationSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1996
- Mazzacco v. PurcellSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1981
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.