Connor v. Schenck

84 S.E.2d 175, 240 N.C. 794, 1954 N.C. LEXIS 528
Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided October 20, 1954·No. 306·Published·Cited by 8 cases

Opinion

*795 Per CueiaM.

Conceding, but not deciding, the plaintiff’s evidence was sufficient for submission to the jury on the issue of defendant’s negligence in 1942, we are confronted by the fact that plaintiff waited some eleven years before commencing this action; and careful consideration of plaintiff’s evidence compels the conclusion that there is no evidence whatever of defendant’s fraudulent concealment such as would constitute a basis of liability or such as would operate to toll the running of the statute of limitations. Hence, plaintiff’s action is barred by the three-year statute; and we need not consider other grounds urged by defendant in support of the judgment of involuntary nonsuit.

Affirmed.

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

Connor v. Schenck, 84 S.E.2d 175, 240 N.C. 794, 1954 N.C. LEXIS 528 (N.C. 1954).

84 S.E.2d 175 (Connor v. Schenck) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Shkodrov v. Carmichael
E.D. North Carolina, 2025
Friedland v. Gales
509 S.E.2d 793 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1998)
Stallings v. Gunter
394 S.E.2d 212 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1990)
Cox v. Stanton
381 F. Supp. 349 (E.D. North Carolina, 1974)
Sellers v. Friedrich Refrigerators, Inc.
194 S.E.2d 817 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1973)
Jewell v. Price
142 S.E.2d 1 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1965)
Shearin v. Lloyd
98 S.E.2d 508 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1957)