Witherspoon v. Owen

110 S.E.2d 830, 251 N.C. 169, 1959 N.C. LEXIS 535
Supreme Court of North Carolina·Decided November 4, 1959·No. 236·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

Per OuRIAm.

Conceding defendant’s duty to protect his patrons against foreseeable assaults by 'others, the patron also had a duty not to needlessly expose himself to danger. Here plaintiff and defendant had equial knowledge. Apparently nothing had transpired which would indicate plaintiff could not descend in safety. So far as appears, the others ahead of him had done eo. But if the conditions were such as to warn defendant that plaintiff might be .assaulted if he attempted to descend, these conditions gave equal warning to plaintiff. He could no more ignore the dangerous condition, if it existed, than could defendant.

Affirmed.

HiggiNS, J., not .sitting.

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

Witherspoon v. Owen, 110 S.E.2d 830, 251 N.C. 169, 1959 N.C. LEXIS 535 (N.C. 1959).

110 S.E.2d 830 (Witherspoon v. Owen) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Taylor v. Walker
360 S.E.2d 796 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1987)
Taylor v. Walker
353 S.E.2d 239 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1987)
Burns v. Forsyth County Hospital Authority, Inc.
344 S.E.2d 839 (Court of Appeals of North Carolina, 1986)
Romero v. Kendricks
390 P.2d 269 (New Mexico Supreme Court, 1964)