Legal Opinion

Fox v. Hollar

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided May 2, 1962No. 389PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtShasp, J.

The plaintiff assigns as error the failure of the trial judge to instruct the jury as to certain duties which he alleged in the complaint were owed to him by the defendants William Lee Hollar and Mrs. Lillie Mae Combs, the operators of two of the vehicles involved in the three-car collision, and the granting of the nonsuit as to the defendant Rudolph Bobby Arnette, the operator of the third vehicle. We will consider first the assignments of error which relate to the defendants William Lee Hollar and R. J. Shell & Son, Inc.

The trial judge instructed the jury, in effect, that if they found that…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Riddle v. ArtisSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1956
  2. Clodfelter v. . WellsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1938
  3. Smith v. RawlinsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1960
  4. Butner v. . WhitlowSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1931
  5. Cozart v. HudsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1954

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Hardee v. Charles Worth YorkSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1964
  2. Jordan v. EASTERN TRANSIT & STORAGE COMPANYSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1966
  3. Terrell v. Life Insurance Company of VirginiaSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1967
  4. Luther v. Asheville Contracting Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1966
  5. Johnson v. DouglasCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1969

1 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