Smith v. Stone

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Smith v. Stone

157 S.E.2d 623, 272 N.C. 113, 1967 N.C. LEXIS 982

DecidedNovember 22, 1967

StatusPublished

This text of 157 S.E.2d 623 (Smith v. Stone) 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. Stone, 157 S.E.2d 623, 272 N.C. 113, 1967 N.C. LEXIS 982 (N.C. 1967).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

All assignments of error discussed in the brief or in the oral argument here involve exceptions to the Court’s charge. When the charge is considered contextually, as it must be, [114]*114it is cleai’, concise, and in accord with the decisions of this Court. It covers all essential elements of negligence, contributory negligence and damages.

The Court placed on the plaintiff the burden of proof on Issues 1 and 3 and on the defendants on Issue 2. The Court instructed that a negative answer to Issue 1 would end the case, or an affirmative answer to Issue 2 would likewise end the case. But, an affirmative answer to Issue 1 and a negative answer to Issue 2 would require the jury to answer Issue 3. The Court gave the jury the proper rules with respect to the quantum of proof necessary to require affirmative answers and further charged that a failure to carry the burden required a negative answer. The Court gave correct rules for the assessment of damages.

No error.

BbaNCh, J., did not participate in the consideration or decision of this case.

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

Per Curiam.

All assignments of error discussed in the brief or in the oral argument here involve exceptions to the Court’s charge. When the charge is considered contextually, as it must be, [114]*114it is cleai’, concise, and in accord with the decisions of this Court. It covers all essential elements of negligence, contributory negligence and damages.

The Court placed on the plaintiff the burden of proof on Issues 1 and 3 and on the defendants on Issue 2. The Court instructed that a negative answer to Issue 1 would end the case, or an affirmative answer to Issue 2 would likewise end the case. But, an affirmative answer to Issue 1 and a negative answer to Issue 2 would require the jury to answer Issue 3. The Court gave the jury the proper rules with respect to the quantum of proof necessary to require affirmative answers and further charged that a failure to carry the burden required a negative answer. The Court gave correct rules for the assessment of damages.

No error.

BbaNCh, J., did not participate in the consideration or decision of this case.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

157 S.E.2d 623, 272 N.C. 113, 1967 N.C. LEXIS 982, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/smith-v-stone-nc-1967.