Case Name: J. C. EPTING, JR., by his Next Friend, J. C. Epting, Sr. v. L. R. STEWART, G. A. STEWART, and C. A. FERREE, t/a R. K. STEWART & SON
Court: Supreme Court of North Carolina
Jurisdiction: North Carolina
Decision Date: 1957-11-27
Citations: 247 N.C. 268
Docket Number: 
Parties: J. C. EPTING, JR., by his Next Friend, J. C. Epting, Sr. v. L. R. STEWART, G. A. STEWART, and C. A. FERREE, t/a R. K. STEWART & SON.
Judges: 
Reporter: North Carolina Reports
Volume: 247
Pages: 268–269

Head Matter:
J. C. EPTING, JR., by his Next Friend, J. C. Epting, Sr. v. L. R. STEWART, G. A. STEWART, and C. A. FERREE, t/a R. K. STEWART & SON.
(Filed 27 November, 1957)
Automobiles § 24—
In this action to recover for injuries sustained when plaintiff pedestrian ran into the end of a steel beam protruding from a truck which had been parked on the school grounds for five to ten minutes, non-suit was properly allowed.
Appeal by plaintiff from Rousseau, J., May Civil Term 1957 of Guilford (High Point Division).
This is a civil action to recover damages for an injury sustained by plaintiff allegedly resulting from the negligence of defendant.
The plaintiff minor, an eleven-year-old student in Oakview School near High Point, Guilford County, North Carolina, about 2:00 p.m. on 15 October 1955, was returning from a playground area, a part of the school grounds, to the school building, when he ran into the end of steel beam lying across the bed of a pickup truck which was parked adjacent to a school building addition then under construction. The steel beam, commonly called an “I” beam, was painted a bright red. This beam had been moved on the truck from a place on the school grounds where it had been stored with other building materials. The truck had been parked near the building under construction from five to ten minutes before the accident occurred.
At the close of plaintiff’s evidence, defendant moved for judgment as of nonsuit. Motion allowed. Plaintiff appeals, assigning error.
Morgan, Byerly & Post for plaintiff appellant.
Smith, Moore, Smith, Schell & Hunter for defendant appellee.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
A review of all the evidence introduced by the plaintiff in the light most favorable to him, in our opinion, is insufficient to carry the case to the jury and support a verdict in his favor.
The ruling of the court below will be upheld.
Affirmed.