Merrell v. Kindley

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Merrell v. Kindley

92 S.E.2d 671, 244 N.C. 118, 1956 N.C. LEXIS 661

CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina

DecidedMay 9, 1956

Docket607

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 92 S.E.2d 671 (Merrell v. Kindley) 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

Merrell v. Kindley, 92 S.E.2d 671, 244 N.C. 118, 1956 N.C. LEXIS 661 (N.C. 1956).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

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

Per Curiam.

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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

92 S.E.2d 671, 244 N.C. 118, 1956 N.C. LEXIS 661, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/merrell-v-kindley-nc-1956.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack