Sellers v. Vereen

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Sellers v. Vereen

148 S.E.2d 98, 267 N.C. 307, 1966 N.C. LEXIS 1034

CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina

DecidedMay 11, 1966

Docket700

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 148 S.E.2d 98 (Sellers v. Vereen) 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

Sellers v. Vereen, 148 S.E.2d 98, 267 N.C. 307, 1966 N.C. LEXIS 1034 (N.C. 1966).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

There is no evidence (or allegation) that, the chair was defective or that the lighting was insufficient. Nor is there evidence the floor in the vicinity of this chair or elsewhere-was in an unsafe condition.

There is no evidence of hidden defects or dangers. All the evidence tends to show it was obvious the chair was a light, lawn-type chair, and that plaintiff was fully aware of this fact. A failure to warn of risks of which a person has knowledge is without significance. Petty v. Print Works, 243 N.C. 292, 304, 90 S.E. 2d 717. “Defendant owed plaintiff, as invitee, the legal duty to maintain the aisles and passageways of its place of business in such condition as a reasonably careful and prudent proprietor would deem sufficient to protect patrons from danger while exercising ordinary care for their own safety.” Harrison v. Williams, 260 N.C. 392, 395, 132 S.E. 2d 869, and cases cited.

In our opinion, the evidence, when considered in the light most favorable to plaintiff, was insufficient to warrant submission of an issue to the jury as to the alleged actionable negligence of defendant. Accordingly, the judgment of involuntary nonsuit is affirmed.

Affirmed.

Moore, J., not sitting.

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

Per Curiam.

There is no evidence (or allegation) that, the chair was defective or that the lighting was insufficient. Nor is there evidence the floor in the vicinity of this chair or elsewhere-was in an unsafe condition.

There is no evidence of hidden defects or dangers. All the evidence tends to show it was obvious the chair was a light, lawn-type chair, and that plaintiff was fully aware of this fact. A failure to warn of risks of which a person has knowledge is without significance. Petty v. Print Works, 243 N.C. 292, 304, 90 S.E. 2d 717. “Defendant owed plaintiff, as invitee, the legal duty to maintain the aisles and passageways of its place of business in such condition as a reasonably careful and prudent proprietor would deem sufficient to protect patrons from danger while exercising ordinary care for their own safety.” Harrison v. Williams, 260 N.C. 392, 395, 132 S.E. 2d 869, and cases cited.

In our opinion, the evidence, when considered in the light most favorable to plaintiff, was insufficient to warrant submission of an issue to the jury as to the alleged actionable negligence of defendant. Accordingly, the judgment of involuntary nonsuit is affirmed.

Affirmed.

Moore, J., not sitting.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

148 S.E.2d 98, 267 N.C. 307, 1966 N.C. LEXIS 1034, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sellers-v-vereen-nc-1966.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack