Bailey Ex Rel. Bailey v. McKay

152 S.E. 893, 198 N.C. 638, 1930 N.C. LEXIS 435
CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina
DecidedApril 30, 1930
StatusPublished
Cited by8 cases

This text of 152 S.E. 893 (Bailey Ex Rel. Bailey v. McKay) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of North Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Bailey Ex Rel. Bailey v. McKay, 152 S.E. 893, 198 N.C. 638, 1930 N.C. LEXIS 435 (N.C. 1930).

Opinion

Stacy, C. J.,

after stating the case: The testimony of S. C. Lewellyn, the only evidence upon which the plaintiff relies for a reversal of the judgment of nonsuit, falls short of the desired purpose on appeal, because of its indefiniteness and uncertainty. The distance of' the car from the scene of the accident, when the witness saw it and observed its speed, is not stated, nor is it determinable from the record. The plain *640 tiff says, however, that tbe testimony of this witness, with its reasonable inferences and intendments, is sufficient to carry tbe ease to tbe jury under tbe principle announced in Ledbetter v. English, 166 N. C., 125, 81 S. E., 1066, and many other cases, while tbe defendants contend otherwise. We are unable to perceive from tbe record any error in tbe judgment.

Tbe burden is on appellant to show error; it is not presumed. Forester v. Vyne, 196 N. C., 477, 146 S. E., 146; Jones v. Candler, 196 N. C., 382, 145 S. E., 691; In re Ross, 182 N. C., 477, 109 S. E., 365.

Affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

LaNeve v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co.
176 S.E. 560 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1934)
Tuttle v. . Bell
165 S.E. 333 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1932)
Baker v. . Clayton
164 S.E. 233 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1932)
Moore v. . Boone
162 S.E. 769 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1932)
Mangum v. . Winstead
162 S.E. 557 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1932)
Frazier v. Piedmont & Northern Railway Co.
161 S.E. 689 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1931)
Poindexter v. Norfolk Southern Railway Co.
160 S.E. 923 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1931)
Jackson Ex Rel. Jackson v. Bell
160 S.E. 283 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1931)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
152 S.E. 893, 198 N.C. 638, 1930 N.C. LEXIS 435, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bailey-ex-rel-bailey-v-mckay-nc-1930.