Legal Opinion

Threatt Ex Rel. Threatt v. Railway Express Agency, Inc.

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided April 29, 1942PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtStacy, C. J.

The question before us is the sufficiency of the evidence to carry the ease to the jury. The record suggests that the demurrer to the evidence should be sustained, if not upon the principal issue of liability, then upon the ground of contributory negligence. Swainey v. Tea Co., 202 N. C., 272, 162 S. E., 557; Miller v. Holland, 196 N. C., 739, 147 S. E., 8. Cf. Wooten v. Smith, 215 N. C., 48, 200 S. E., 921; Hood v. Bottling Co., 192 N. C., 827, 135 S. E., 609. Both the driver •of the truck and the plaintiff were charged with the mutual and reciprocal duty to exercise reasonable care under…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Mills v. MooreSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1941
  2. Mills v. . MooreSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1941
  3. Cole v. . R. R.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1937
  4. Diamond v. McDonald Service StoresSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1937
  5. Tart Ex Rel. Tart v. Southern Railway Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1932

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Shellenberger v. ZemanWashington Supreme Court · 1956
  2. Toney Ex Rel. Toney v. HendersonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1947

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API