O'Neil v. . Braswell

Supreme Court of North Carolina

O'Neil v. . Braswell

8 S.E.2d 817, 217 N.C. 561, 1940 N.C. LEXIS 290

DecidedMay 8, 1940

StatusPublished

This text of 8 S.E.2d 817 (O'Neil v. . Braswell) 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

O'Neil v. . Braswell, 8 S.E.2d 817, 217 N.C. 561, 1940 N.C. LEXIS 290 (N.C. 1940).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The unusual happening about which plaintiff complains might have been produced by any one of several causes, but the sufficiency of the evidence does not depend upon the doctrine of chances. S. v. Prince, 182 N. C., 788, 108 S. E., 330. We concur in the conclusion of the court below that there is no sufficient evidence of any negligent act by defendant from which it could foresee that injury was likely to occur.

The court below did not find as a fact that the witness Braswell was an expert. The exclusion of his opinion testimony, based upon a hypothetical question, cannot be held for error.

The judgment of nonsuit is

Affirmed.

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