New Amsterdam Casualty Company v. Gray

116 S.E.2d 146, 253 N.C. 60, 1960 N.C. LEXIS 448
CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina
DecidedSeptember 21, 1960
Docket23
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 116 S.E.2d 146 (New Amsterdam Casualty Company v. Gray) 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
New Amsterdam Casualty Company v. Gray, 116 S.E.2d 146, 253 N.C. 60, 1960 N.C. LEXIS 448 (N.C. 1960).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

If the automobile was defective in any respect, the record fails to disclose any evidence, direct or circumstantial, tending to show what the defect consisted of. No causal connection between the excessive heating and the fire is made to appear. Furthermore, there is no contention that heat or fumes had ever been emitted while the car was not in operation. Recovery may not be predicated on conjecture. No evidence has been adduced from which the cause of the fire may be reasonably inferred.

The judgment below is

Affirmed.

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

Related

Bulliner v. General Motors Corp.
54 F.R.D. 479 (E.D. North Carolina, 1971)
Brown v. Ford Motor Company
287 F. Supp. 906 (D. South Carolina, 1968)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
116 S.E.2d 146, 253 N.C. 60, 1960 N.C. LEXIS 448, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/new-amsterdam-casualty-company-v-gray-nc-1960.