Beaver v. Lefler, 7019SC285
| Decision Date | 24 June 1970 |
| Docket Number | No. 7019SC285,7019SC285 |
| Court | North Carolina Court of Appeals |
| Parties | Ed Luther BEAVER v. Franklin P. LEFLER and wife, Annabell R. Lefler. |
Thomas K. Spence, Concord, for plaintiff appellant.
Wardlow, Knox, Caudle & Wade, by Lloyd C. Caudle, Charlotte, for defendant appellees.
Plaintiff contends that because he was helping defendants carry meat into their house his status was that of an invitee and not a licensee at the time of the accident in defendants' home. The authorities, however, support the view that he was a bare licensee. Murrell v. Handley, 245 N.C. 559, 96 S.E.2d 727, and cases therein cited; Jenkins v. R. T. Brothers, 3 N.C.App. 303, 164 S.E.2d 504.
'Minor services performed by a guest for the host during the course of a visit will not change the status of the guest from a licensee to an invitee.' Murrell v. Handley, Supra.
Plaintiff and male defendant were friends and were accustomed to helping each other do odd jobs around their houses. At the time of the accident, plaintiff was helping carry into defendants' house a portion of a load of meat. This constituted a minor or incidental service performed by the plaintiff for male defendant and one the nature of which each customarily performed for the other. In going upon the premises of defendants, plaintiff was neither a customer nor a servant nor a trespasser.
The only evidence as to the condition of the floor prior to plaintiff's fall was plaintiff's testimony that he did not see any leaves or water on the kitchen floor as he walked into the kitchen. Plaintiff did not slip and fall on his way into the house although he was carrying a large box of meat and was unable to see; he slipped and fell after he had placed the meat on the table and had started back toward the door he had just entered. Plaintiff's own evidence discloses that he had reason to believe the floor was wet and that if he had been keeping a proper lookout he would have seen the wet leaves on the floor.
In our opinion the evidence bearing on the question of negligence was insufficient to justify submission of this case to the jury.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Nelson v. Freeland
...more perplexing when the preceding case is read in light of some other North Carolina decisions. For example, in Beaver v. Lefler, 8 N.C.App. 574, 174 S.E.2d 806 (1970), our Court of Appeals classified the plaintiff as a licensee when he was injured helping his neighbor carry meat into his ......
-
Crane v. Caldwell
...changed to that of an invitee merely because he was injured while unloading groceries into the defendant's house. Beaver v. Lefler, 8 N.C.App. 574, 174 S.E.2d 806 (1970). However, in Mazzacco, supra, the Supreme Court held that the plaintiff, who traveled from New Jersey to North Carolina t......
-
Briles v. Briles, 7919SC107
...a minor service, incidental to their visit, and relies upon Murrell v. Handley, 245 N.C. 559, 96 S.E.2d 717 (1957); Beaver v. Lefler, 8 N.C.App. 574, 174 S.E.2d 806 (1970); and Jenkins v. Brothers, 3 N.C.App. 303, 164 S.E.2d 504 (1968), Cert. denied, 275 N.C. 137 (1969). These cases are all......
-
McCurry v. Wilson, 8724SC1054
...changed simply because the plaintiff was injured while unloading a truckload of food into defendant's house. Beaver v. Lefler, 8 N.C.App. 574, 576, 174 S.E.2d 806, 807 (1970). This Court reasoned that, as friends and neighbors for seven years, plaintiff and defendant had helped each other m......