Court Opinion

ID: 6698963
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-07-20 22:03:43.338784+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:01:20.907314
License: Public Domain

DeviN, J.
In order to impose liability upon the lessor for injuries to a third person on leased premises or from contact with leased mechanical appliances, alleged to have been out of repair and defective, it must be made to appear that the lessor had either contracted to repair and maintain, or that “he knowingly demised premises in a ruinous condition or *243in a trate of nuisance,” or tliat he “authorized the wrong.” Mercer v. Williams. 210 N. C., 456, 187 S. E., 556; Wilson v. Dowtin, 215 N. C., 547, 2 S. E. (2d), 549; Wellons v. Sherrin, 217 N. C., 534, 8 S. E. (2d), 820; Livingston v. Investment Co., 219 N. C., 416, 14 S. E. (2d), 489; Childress v. Lawrence, 220 N. C., 195, 16 S. E. (2d), 842; Harrill v. Refining Co., 225 N. C., 421, 35 S. E. (2d), 240; Jordan v. Miller, 179 N. C.. 73, 101 S. E., 550; Hudson v. Silk Co,, 185 N. C., 342, 117 S. E., 162; Tucker v. Yarn Mills, 194 N. C., 756, 140 S. E., 744.
Evidence to support either of these positions as basis of recovery against the defendant Oil Corporation seems to he lacking, and we think the judgment of nonsuit was properly entered.
Judgment, affirmed.