Cook v. Stedman

• Decision Date: 15 June 1936
• Docket Number: 766.
• Citation: 186 S.E. 317,210 N.C. 345
• Parties: COOK v. STEDMAN.
• Court: North Carolina Supreme Court

186 S.E. 317

210 N.C. 345

COOK v. STEDMAN.

No. 766.

Supreme Court of North Carolina

June 15, 1936

Appeal from Superior Court, Forsyth County; Clement, Judge.

Action by Edna M. Cook against J. Porter Stedman.From a judgment of nonsuit, plaintiff appeals.

Affirmed.

In action against owner of automobile for injury to plaintiff while automobile was operated by one to whom owner loaned it where there was no evidence of any prior recklessness or incompetency of driver or knowledge of owner that driver was incompetent, evidence of liability of owner held insufficient for jury.

Action for damages for personal injury alleged to have been caused by the negligence of the defendant in the operation of his automobile by an incompetent driver to whom it had been loaned.

At the conclusion of the plaintiff's evidence, motion for judgment of nonsuit was sustained, and from judgment in accordance with this ruling, plaintiff appealed.

E. E Risner, John C. Wallace, and Parrish & Deal, all of Winston-Salem, for appellant.

Hutchins & Parker, of Winston-Salem, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

The only ground upon which plaintiff seeks to impose liability upon the defendant, the owner of the automobile, is the incompetency of the driver to whom it was loaned.

It is well settled that liability does not arise from mere ownership of an automobile, nor can it be based solely on the danger of the machine.The burden was on the plaintiff to show, in addition to the fact of ownership, that the car was loaned to a reckless and incompetent driver, and that the incompetency of the driver was known to the owner.Huddy on Automobiles, 795-797, 838;Taylor v. Caudle,210 N.C. 60, 185 S.E. 446;Linville v. Nissen,162 N.C 95, 77 S.E. 1096.

The only pertinent evidence offered by the plaintiff...