Home/Supreme Court of North Carolina/Smith v. . Cathey

Smith v. . Cathey

191 S.E. 505, 211 N.C. 747, 1937 N.C. LEXIS 215
CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina
DecidedJune 9, 1937
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 191 S.E. 505 (Smith v. . Cathey) 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
Smith v. . Cathey, 191 S.E. 505, 211 N.C. 747, 1937 N.C. LEXIS 215 (N.C. 1937).

Opinion

Pee, Curiam.

We see no error in the judgment of the court below. The allegations of the complaint, construed in a light most favorable to plaintiff, do not state facts .sufficient to constitute a cause of action (C. S., 511 [6]) against defendants G. M. Cathey and Buster Green, trading as Arrow Taxicab Company. When the assault took place, Barther Groves, an employee of the Arrow Taxicab Company, was not about his master’s business, nor was his act in the scope of his employment. Ferguson v. Spinning Co., 196 N. C., 614; Jackson v. Scheiber, 209 N. C., 441.

The judgment of the court below is

Affirmed.

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

Related

Hoppe Ex Rel. Hoppe v. Deese
61 S.E.2d 903 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1950)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
191 S.E. 505, 211 N.C. 747, 1937 N.C. LEXIS 215, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/smith-v-cathey-nc-1937.