Merrell v. Kindley
92 S.E.2d 671, 244 N.C. 118, 1956 N.C. LEXIS 661
Opinion
The only question presented is the sufficiency of the evidence of negligence to withstand the motion for nonsuit. Negligence is not to be presumed from the mere fact that an accident has occurred. The only evidence in the record against the defendant is that he sounded his horn and his car hit the plaintiff. All else is left to conjecture. In *120 no aspect of the case does the evidence show actionable negligence. Consequently the judgment of nonsuit must be
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Merrell v. Kindley, 92 S.E.2d 671, 244 N.C. 118, 1956 N.C. LEXIS 661 (N.C. 1956).
92 S.E.2d 671 (Merrell v. Kindley) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Johns Ex Rel. Earney v. Day
127 S.E.2d 543 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1962)
Brewer v. Green
119 S.E.2d 610 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1961)
Grant v. Royal
108 S.E.2d 627 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1959)
Hodgin v. Guilford Tractor & Implement Co.
101 S.E.2d 323 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1958)
Fleming v. Twiggs
94 S.E.2d 821 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1956)