Parker v. . Belotta

200 S.E. 887, 215 N.C. 87, 1939 N.C. LEXIS 202

• Court: Supreme Court of North Carolina
• Decided: February 1, 1939
• Status: Published

Opinion

Stacy, C. J.

The case was tried upon the theory that plaintiff was not entitled to recover for loss of time or diminished earning capacity during his minority, nor for hospital bills. Shipp v. Stage Lines, 192 N. C., 475, 135 S. E., 339. Any right of action which plaintiff’s father may have was carefully preserved. Floyd v. R. R., 167 N. C., 55, 83 S. E., 12; Williams v. R. R., 121 N. C., 512, 28 S. E., 367.

In this view of the matter, we think it was error to admit evidence of what hospital bills had been incurred “for the treatment of Harold on account of his broken leg,” especially as these bills were for two separate injuries. In this respect the case is not unlike Blaine v. Lyle, 213 N. C., 529, 196 S. E., 833, and Pemberton v. Greensboro, 208 N. C., 466, 181 S. E., 258.

Moreover, it is not altogether certain that defendants were not prejudiced by having the issue of liability and the issue of damages tried separately or before different juries. Gregg v. Wilmington, 155 N. C., 18, 70 S. E., 1070; Jarrett v. Trunk Co., 144 N. C., 299, 56 S. E., 937; McIntosh, N. C. Prac. & Proc., 679.

A general new trial will be awarded. It is so ordered.

New trial.