Case ID: nc_261/html/0740-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Per Curiam.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

CHARLES B. SMITH v. JOYCE LEE HARRIS.
    (Filed 29 April, 1964.)
    Appeal by defendant from Nimocks, E. J., October 1963 Civil Session of HARNETT.
    Civil action to recover damages to an automobile arising out of a collision of two automobiles in a street intersection in the town of Dunn.
    Defendant in his answer denied negligence and conditionally pleaded contributory negligence of plaintiff as a bar to recovery.
    The case was first heard at the October Term 1961 of Harnett County recorder’s court and resulted in a judgment of compulsory nonsuit. Plaintiff appealed from the judgment to the superior court. In the superior court the case was heard de novo. Issues of (1) negligence, of (2) contributory negligence, and of (3) damages were submitted to the jury. The jury answered the first issue Yes, the second issue No, and awarded plaintiff damages in the sum of $250. From a judgment on the verdict, defendant appeals.
    
      Morgan and Williams for defendant appellant.
    
    
      Wilson •& Bain by Edgar B. Bain and E. Marshall Woodall for plaintiff appellee.
    
   Per Curiam.

Plaintiff offered evidence; defendant offered none. Defendant’s sole assignment of error is to the denial of his motion for judgment of compulsory nonsuit. This action arose out of two automobiles colliding in a street intersection. Since the advent of automobiles in large numbers, our Reports have been filled with such cases, and the applicable rules of law have been stated and repeated and repeated time after time. A study of the evidence in the instant case shows that the plaintiff has sufficient evidence to carry the case to the jury, that defendant was negligent in the operation of his automobile, and that such negligence was a proximate cause of the damage to plaintiff's automobile, and further that plaintiff has not proved himself out of court so as to be nonsuited on the ground of contributory negligence.

The verdict and judgment below will not be disturbed.

Affirmed.