Legal Opinion

Howard v. Bingham

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided February 3, 1950No. 749PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDevin, J.

The only error assigned in defendants’ appeal was the denial of their motion for judgment of nonsuit, and the only ground upon which it was argued that this motion should have been sustained was that on plaintiff’s testimony the injury to his automobile proximately resulted from his own contributory negligence.

While contributory negligence is an affirmative defense and within the rule that ordinarily nonsuit will not be allowed in favor of the party upon whom rests the burden of proof (Sims v. Lindsay, 122 N.C. 678, 30 S.E. 19), the principle is well settled that when the plaintiff’s own…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Cole v. KoonceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1938
  2. Conley Ex Rel. Conley v. Pearce-Young-Angel Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1944
  3. Cole v. . KoonceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1938
  4. Williams v. Frederickson Motor Express Lines, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1930
  5. Cox v. LeeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1949

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

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Perkins v. LangdonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1953
  2. Winkler v. Appalachian Amusement Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1953
  3. Matheny v. Central Motor Lines, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1951
  4. Pruett v. InmanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1960
  5. Marshburn v. PattersonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1955

9 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