Connor v. Schenck
This text of 84 S.E.2d 175 (Connor v. Schenck) 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.
Opinion
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
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
84 S.E.2d 175, 240 N.C. 794, 1954 N.C. LEXIS 528, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/connor-v-schenck-nc-1954.