Legal Opinion
Roberts v. William N. & Kate B. Reynolds Mem. Park
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Decided April 12, 1972No. 69PublishedCited by 81 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
BRANCH, Justice.
The sole question presented by this appeal is whether the trial judge erred in granting defendants’ motion for a directed verdict.
It is the duty of a bailor for hire to see that the vehicle bailed is in good condition. While he is not an insurer, he is liable for injury to the bailee or a third person for injuries proximately caused by a defect in the vehicle of which he had knowledge or which he could have discovered by reasonable care and inspection. Hudson v. Drive It Yourself, Inc., 236 N.C. 503, 73 S.E. 2d 4.
A motion for a directed verdict presents the question of…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Sutton v. DukeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1970
- Kelly v. International Harvester CompanySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1971
- Cutts v. CaseySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1971
- George J. Gallon v. The Lloyd-Thomas Company, a CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1959
- Norburn v. MacKieSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1964
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by81 opinions
- Concrete Service Corp. v. Investors Group, Inc.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1986
- Hartley v. BallouSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1974
- Eudy v. EudySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1975
- Mauney v. MorrisSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1986
- Vernon v. CristSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1977
76 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.