Ross v. Sterling Drug Store
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtStacy, C. J.
In addition to tbe allegations of negligence in respect of tbe condition of tbe doorway and tbe operation of tbe door in question, it is specifically alleged tbat tbe defendants “negligently failed to give any warning thereof.”
Tbe court instructed tbe jury tbat tbe defendant Drug Company owed to tbe plaintiff, a customer and invitee, “tbe duty to exercise due care to keep tbe premises in a reasonably safe condition and to give warning of any bidden peril. Tbat duty to use due care, to keep tbe premises in a reasonably safe condition, extends to any doors, door-checks and instru-mentalities…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Watkins v. Taylor Furnishing Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1944
- Williams v. . Stores Co., Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1936
- Bowden v. S. H. Kress & Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1930
- Griggs v. . Sears, Roebuck Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1940
3Cited by17 opinions
- Raper v. McCRORY-McLELLAN CORPORATIONSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1963
- Garner v. Atlantic Greyhound CorporationSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1959
- Fanelty v. Rogers Jewelers, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1949
- Revis v. OrrSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1951
- Hood v. Queen City Coach CompanySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1959
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.