Duren v. City of Charlotte

185 S.E. 434, 210 N.C. 824, 1936 N.C. LEXIS 240
Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided April 29, 1936·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Plaintiff’s evidence fails to make out a case of actionable negligence against the city of Charlotte. Walker v. Reidsville, 96 N. C., 382, 2 S. E., 74. It is not perceived wherein the defendant omitted to discharge any duty which it owed to the plaintiff. She was not injured by reason of any defect in the street or sidewalk. Haney v. Lincolnton, 207 N. C., 282, 176 S. E., 573. The judgment of nonsuit is correct.

Affirmed.

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

Duren v. City of Charlotte, 185 S.E. 434, 210 N.C. 824, 1936 N.C. LEXIS 240 (N.C. 1936).

185 S.E. 434 (Duren v. City of Charlotte) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Whitacre v. City of Charlotte
6 S.E.2d 558 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1940)