Priest v. Thompson

119 S.E.2d 613, 254 N.C. 673, 1961 N.C. LEXIS 504
CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina
DecidedMay 10, 1961
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 119 S.E.2d 613 (Priest v. Thompson) 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
Priest v. Thompson, 119 S.E.2d 613, 254 N.C. 673, 1961 N.C. LEXIS 504 (N.C. 1961).

Opinion

PeR Curiam.

The plaintiff’s evidence disclosed he was the only mechanic in the party. While the defendant examined the engine the plaintiff accelerated it. The two changed places. The mechanic was in the act of making the examination and the owner, back under the wheel, accelerated the engine. As the switch was cut off, one of the blades separated from the hub of the fan, striking the plaintiff and causing his injury. The evidence does not disclose how or by what means either party could reasonably foresee such injurious consequences. Hence the judgment of nonsuit was proper and is

Affirmed.

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

Related

McDonald Ex Rel. McDonald v. Moore Sheet Metal & Heating Co.
151 S.E.2d 27 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1966)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
119 S.E.2d 613, 254 N.C. 673, 1961 N.C. LEXIS 504, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/priest-v-thompson-nc-1961.