Case Name: SARAH HUGHES McCRANIE by her Next Friend, CHARLES H. McCRANIE v. ALBERT WILSON CROWDER
Court: Supreme Court of North Carolina
Jurisdiction: North Carolina
Decision Date: 1962-04-18
Citations: 256 N.C. 735
Docket Number: 
Parties: SARAH HUGHES McCRANIE by her Next Friend, CHARLES H. McCRANIE v. ALBERT WILSON CROWDER.
Judges: 
Reporter: North Carolina Reports
Volume: 256
Pages: 735–736

Head Matter:
SARAH HUGHES McCRANIE by her Next Friend, CHARLES H. McCRANIE v. ALBERT WILSON CROWDER.
(Filed 18 April, 1962.)
Appeal by defendant from Gwyn, J., September 1961 Civil Term, ÁNSON Superior Court.
The plaintiff, by her father as next friend, instituted this civil action against the defendant to recover for personal injury and damage to her 1950 DeSoto automobile allegedly caused by the actionable negligence of the defendant who, by answer, denied negligence and by cross action alleged the collision between his Oldsmobile and the plaintiff’s DeSoto resulted from the plaintiff’s sole negligence which proximately caused his personal injury and damage to his vehicle.
The complaint alleged that plaintiff was driving west on Highway No. 74 in Anson County and “while attempting to malee a left turn from said highway approximately in front of the Peachland Public School, the defendant, also traveling west on said highway, negligently and recklessly drove his motor vehicle into the plaintiff’s motor vehicle, causing the plaintiff severe personal injury . . . and property damage.”
The defendant, by answer and counterclaim, alleged: "... suddenly and without warning an automobile was driven from a parking area on the north side of Highway No. 74 onto said highway and directly into the path of the defendant’s motor vehicle, so that it was necessary for him to turn onto the left-hand side of the highway to avoid a collision . . . when suddenly and without warning the motor vehicle being driven by the plaintiff, . . . turned to the left-hand side of the highway . . . into the path of the defendant’s vehicle, so that it was impossible for the defendant to avoid a collision, . . .”
Each party offered evidence tending to support the allegations made in his pleading. The court submitted issues of negligence, contributory negligence, and damages which the jury answered in favor of the plaintiff. From the judgment on the verdict, the defendant appealed.
Brock & McLendon, By Walter E. Brock for plaintiff appellee.
Taylor, Kitchin & Taylor, By H. P. Taylor, Jr., for defendant appellant.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
The evidence of the parties was sharply conflicting. Each party claimed to have observed the rules of the road. Each claimed the other violated them. The jury resolved the conflict by ac cepting the plaintiff's version and found the defendant's negligence caused the accident. The record does not disclose any reason sufficient in law to disturb the result of the trial.
No error.