Caughron v. Walker
| Decision Date | 23 November 1955 |
| Docket Number | No. 526,526 |
| Court | North Carolina Supreme Court |
| Parties | William O. CAUGHRON v. Gienn WALKER, Billy Ray Walker and W. R. Walker, Guardian ad litem, for Billy Ray Walker. |
Ottway Burton, Asheboro, for plaintiff-appellant.
No counsel contra.
This is a civil action in tort brought by the plaintiff to recover damages for injury to his automobile, allegedly caused by the negligence of the defendants. The trial court allowed the defendants' motion for judgment as of nonsuit at the close of the plaintiff's evidence. The appeal challenges the correctness of this ruling and brings into forus the facts disclosed by the evidence, which are summarized as follows:
The wreck occurred about 6:30 a. m. on the morning of 10 July, 1953, on the Flint Hill Road at the junction of the Hoover Hill Road, in Randolph County. The Flint Hill Road runs north and south. It is joined on the east side, but not crossed, by the Hoover Hill Road, which runs southwest for some distance south of the junction and converges into the Flint Hill Road at an angle of about 45 degrees. The two roads thus form a 'V' on the south side of the junction. A stop sign facing southwest on the Hoover Hill Road just south of the junction made the Flint Hill Road the dominant, through highway, and the Hoover Hill Road the servient highway. Two vehicles were involved in the wreck a GMC truck and a Mercury automobile. The Mercury belonged to the plaintiff. His son was driving it northwardly along the Flint Hill Road toward the junction. The truck, admittedly owned by the defendant Glenn Walker, was being driven by his alleged agent, Billy Ray Walker, along the Hoover Hill Road in a northeasterly direction approaching the junction.
As the two vehicles approached the junction, the plaintiff's Mercury was on the favored highway as designated by the stop sign. Notwithstanding this, the driver of the truck, approaching from the left on the servient road, did not come to a complete stop. Instead, he drove on into the intersection and made a left turn to go north along the Flint Hill Road, directly in front of the plaintiff's oncoming Mercury. Whereupon the driver of the Mercury made a sharp turn to the right in order to avoid colliding with the rear of the truck. In doing so he ran off the highway on the right side and overturned about 100 feet north of the junction, causing substantial damage to the Mercury.
Patrolman J. B. Barrett, who arrived immediately after the wreck, testified in part: Cross-examination:
Steve Caughron, operator of the plaintiff's Mercury, testified in part: ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Whiteside v. McCarson, 30
...450, 88 S.E.2d 104; Elliott v. Killian, 242 N.C. 471, 87 S.E.2d 903; Davis v. Lawrence, 242 N.C. 496, 87 S.E.2d 915; Caughron v. Walker, 243 N.C. 153, 90 S.E.2d 305; Brothers v. Jernigan, 244 N.C. 441, 94 S.E.2d 316; Kellogg v. Thomas, 244 N.C. 722, 94 S.E.2d 903; Scott v. Lee, 245 N.C. 68,......
-
Pippens v. May
...in the exercise of due care, danger of such collision is discovered or should have been discovered”) (citing Caughron v.. Walker, 243 N.C. 153, 157, 90 S.E.2d 305, 307 (1955)). As a result, a jury might have reasonably concluded, based upon this evidence, that Defendant did not act unreason......
-
Smith v. Buie
...v. Atlantic Refining Co., 236 N.C. 643, 74 S.E.2d 17; Loving v. Whitton, 241 N.C. 273, 84 S.E.2d 919.' Johnson, J., in Caughron v. Walker, 243 N.C. ---, 90 S.E.2d 305. Here plaintiff observed defendant's car on Edinborough Street, going west, at a speed of 30 to 35 miles per hour. It was th......
-
Wooten v. Russell, 235
...thereon. ' Williamson v. Randall, 248 N.C. 20, 102 S.E.2d 381; Jackson v. McCoury, 247 N.C. 502, 101 S.E.2d 377; Caughron v. Walker, 243 N.C. 153, 90 S.E.2d 305; Smith v. Buie, 243 N.C. 209, 90 S.E.2d 514; Loving v. Whitton, 241 N.C. 273, 84 S.E.2d 919; Marshburn v. Patterson, 241 N.C. 441,......