Jones v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co.
This text of 16 S.E.2d 455 (Jones v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co.) 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
Plaintiff instituted ber action to recover damages for personal injury due to a fall in tbe defendant’s store. This, she alleged, was due to an accumulation of oil or grease on the floor. At the conclusion of all the evidence defendant renewed its motion for judgment of nonsuit, and this was allowed, and judgment rendered dismissing the action. Plaintiff appealed.
An examination of the plaintiff’s evidence, as shown by the record, leads us to the conclusion that its probative force does not measure up to that held sufficient to go to the jury in Anderson v. Amusement Co., 213 N. C., 130, 195 S. E., 386, but that the case is rather governed by the decision in Pratt v. Tea Co., 218 N. C., 732, 12 S. E. (2d), 242.
The judgment of nonsuit is
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
16 S.E.2d 455, 220 N.C. 817, 1941 N.C. LEXIS 591, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jones-v-great-atlantic-pacific-tea-co-nc-1941.