Barlow v. City Bus Lines

• Decision Date: 20 October 1948
• Docket Number: 306
• Citation: 49 S.E.2d 793,229 N.C. 382
• Parties: BARLOW v. CITY BUS LINES, Inc.
• Court: North Carolina Supreme Court

49 S.E.2d 793

229 N.C. 382

BARLOW v. CITY BUS LINES, Inc.

No. 306

Supreme Court of North Carolina

October 20, 1948

Civil action for damages to plaintiff's automobile resulting from rear-end collision with defendant's bus, allegedly stopped on highway in the nighttime without proper signals or lights.

On the night of October 24, 1947, about 11:30 p. m., the plaintiff was driving his 1941 Ford car, in foggy and rainy weather, on Highway No. 321, just outside the city limits of Hickory when he struck the rear end of defendant City bus while it was standing on the paved portion of the highway, discharging a passenger.

Plaintiff says: 'It happened on a little curve in the road. * * * The first thing I knew the bus stopped right in front of me * * * right on the highway, and I could not look around him because a car was coming from the opposite direction; it was raining and foggy. * * * I could not see any stop lights on the car (bus). It was dirty and muddy. I didn't see any brake lights. I was driving about 25 to 35 miles an hour. I hit the bus * * * and crossed to the other side of the highway. * * * There were no signs along the highway indicating a bus stop. * * * I asked the driver how come him to have on no stop lights, and he tried them and they wouldn't work. (Cross examination) It was a foggy night * * * in a thicklysettled section. * * * I had been through there a good many times. I could not see 300 yards ahead that night. I could have if he had had on any red lights. I could have seen him nearly 1000 feet. * * * I don't know how far I skidded before hitting the bus, it was not a long distance. * * * I did not see it stepped off.'

The Highway Patrolman who investigated the accident, testified that the markings on the highway indicated that plaintiff's brakes were applied approximately 35 feet before the impact, and the tracks which led from the rear of the bus indicated a distance of 65 feet from the point of impact to where the Ford had stopped on the lefthand side of the road next to a wire fence. 'I found that the two auxiliary stop lights on the bus were not burning. The two small lights on the rear of the bus which were equipped at the time with three small lights on the top of the bus, with two small lights on the bottom of the bus, which is a combination stop light and red light, were in operation. * * * The lights were not clear; they had a skim of film on the outside at that time. The auxiliary lights were not burning. * * * The bus is between 9 and 10 feet high * * * was lighted on the inside when I arrived, but I don't know whether it was lighted at the time of the collision. * * * The auxiliary brake light was not burning; the two regulation lights were working, but they were very dim due to the fact that a film was on the inside of the light. There was some film over the lights at the top of the bus. * * * I couldn't say whether the lights were burning at the time of the impact but they were not burning when I got there. I couldn't see because it was foggy. * * * It was very foggy and the road was wet at the time'.

From judgment of nonsuit entered at the close of plaintiff's evidence, he appeals, assigning error.

W. H Strickland, of Lenoir, for plaintiff-appellant.

Folger L. Townsend, of Lenoir, for defendant-appellee.

STACY Chief Justice.

The question for decision is whether the evidence survives the demurrer. The trial court answered in the negative. We are inclined to a different...