McKoy v. . Craven

153 S.E. 412, 198 N.C. 780, 1930 N.C. LEXIS 484
Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided June 6, 1930·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

Adams, J.

Tbe plaintiff and tbe defendant were equally in fault. If one can recover so can the other. Thus there would be “mutual faults and mutual recoveries, which would contradict tbe saying that ‘law is tbe perfection of reason.’” Herring v. R. R., 32 N. C., 402. It is settled by tbe decisions of this Court that tbe plaintiff is not entitled to damages- upon tbe verdict. Baker v. R. R., 118 N. C., 1015; Sasser v. Lumber Co., 165 N. C., 242; Carter v. R. R., ibid., 244, 255; Holton v. Moore, ibid., 549. It will be noted that there is no issue as to tbe last clear chance. Gunter v. Wicker, 85 N. C., 310; Edge v. R. R., 153 N. C., 212. Tbe appellant cites Wood v. Jones, ante, 356; but in that case tbe second issue was whether tbe defendant, not tbe plaintiff, bad by bis own negligence contributed to bis injury. A new trial was given because tbe verdict was indefinite.

No error.

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

McKoy v. . Craven, 153 S.E. 412, 198 N.C. 780, 1930 N.C. LEXIS 484 (N.C. 1930).

153 S.E. 412 (McKoy v. . Craven) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Brown v. Bass
136 S.E.2d 36 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1964)
Bullard v. Ross
205 N.C. 495 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1933)
Crane v. . Carswell
166 S.E. 746 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1932)
Allen v. . Yarborough
160 S.E. 833 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1931)
Frick Co. v. . Shelton
158 S.E. 837 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1931)