Mangum v. . Winstead

162 S.E. 557, 202 N.C. 252, 1932 N.C. LEXIS 475
CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina
DecidedFebruary 17, 1932
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 162 S.E. 557 (Mangum v. . Winstead) 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
Mangum v. . Winstead, 162 S.E. 557, 202 N.C. 252, 1932 N.C. LEXIS 475 (N.C. 1932).

Opinion

Stacy, C. J.

In the face of the verdict, which is not challenged by the appeal, it- would be singular if the plaintiff should also recover in the instant case. One who causes or contributes to- an injury by his own negligence is not entitled to damages therefor. Neither plaintiff nor defendant is permitted to recover for injuries resulting from a collision when the negligence of each contributed thereto as a proximate cause. Construction Co. v. R. R., 184 N. C., 179, 113 S. E., 672. It follows, therefore, that the judgment of nonsuit on plaintiff’s cause of action, which seems correct upon the evidence, must, upon its own merits and for this additional reason, be sustained. In any view of the ease, the *254 plaintiff has failed to overcome the presumption against error. Jackson v. Bell. 201 N. C., 336, 159 S. E., 926; Bailey v. McKay, 198 N. C., 638, 152 S. E., 893. To prevail on appeal, he who alleges error must successfully handle the laboring oar. Frazier v. R. R., ante 11; Poindexter v. R. R., 201 N. C., 833, 159 S. E., 926.

Affirmed.

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

Related

Absher v. City of Raleigh
190 S.E. 897 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1937)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
162 S.E. 557, 202 N.C. 252, 1932 N.C. LEXIS 475, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mangum-v-winstead-nc-1932.