Crowe v. Crowe, 171
| Decision Date | 06 March 1963 |
| Docket Number | No. 171,171 |
| Citation | 129 S.E.2d 585,259 N.C. 55 |
| Parties | Dewey CROWE v. Stanley Sam CROWE. |
| Court | North Carolina Supreme Court |
Henry M. Whitesides, Gastonia, for plaintiff-appellant.
Mullen, Holland & Cooke, by Philip V. Harrell, Gastonia, for defendant-appellee.
Plaintiff offered evidence as follows:
About 10:00 o'clock a. m. on 30 April 1961 plaintiff was riding as a passenger in a Ford station wagon owned and driven by his son, the defendant, on what is known as the Hudson Prison Camp Road in Caldwell County. This is a hard-surfaced road. After defendant passed the prison camp there were two curves in the road ahead of him--one to the right, 'then 200 to 225 straight,' and then a sharp curve to the left. At this place in the road there is a white line in the center of the road and yellow lines on both sides of the white line nearly all of the way. Defendant was driving at a speed of 40 to 50 miles an hour in the middle of the road in the vicinity of the curves. After he got out of the first curve to the right, plaintiff told him he had better slow down because the next curve was a sharp curve. When defendant started into the left curve, he was driving 40 to 50 miles an hour in the center of the road. Suddenly his right front tire blew out. He 'throwed on' his brakes, and the station wagon started skidding, and skidded about 30 feet into a ditch and into a bank, where it came to rest. Plaintiff was thrown into the dashboard, ended up on the floorboard, and sustained injuries.
There is no evidence that the tries on the station wagon were worn or slick or old. Plaintiff testified, 'he [defendant] usually kept good tires on his car.'
Plaintiff testified, 'there is a 35 mile per hour speed sign where you turn onto Hudson Prison Camp Road from U. S. Highway #321. ' That is a considerable distance from where the accident occurred. His son-in-law, J. D. Buchanan, a witness for him, testified, 'there are not any speed signs on Hudson Prison Camp Road near the accident.'
It is manifest that the sole proximate cause of plaintiff's injuries was the sudden blowout of the right front tire on defendant's station wagon. There is nothing in the evidence tending to show that defendant, or any person of ordinary prudence, could have reasonably foreseen that the right front tire on his station wagon would suddenly blow out under the facts as they then and there existed. 'Foreseeable injury is a requisite of proximate cause, and proximate cause is...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Hairston v. Alexander Tank and Equipment Co., 80PA83
...to the requested instruction. The law of the sudden emergency doctrine has been thoroughly stated by this Court. Crowe v. Crowe, 259 N.C. 55, 129 S.E.2d 585 (1963); Schloss v. Hallman, 255 N.C. 686, 122 S.E.2d 513 (1961); Brunson v. Gainey, 245 N.C. 152, 95 S.E.2d 514 (1956); Hoke v. Greyho......
-
Wilcox v. Glover Motors, Inc., 116
...counsel for Anders (not his counsel in this Court) read to the jury excerpts from the published opinions of this Court in Crowe v. Crowe, 259 N.C. 55, 129 S.E.2d 585; Stephens v. Southern Oil Co., 259 N.C. 456, 131 S.E.2d 39; and Hudson v. Drive It Yourself, 236 N.C. 503, 73 S.E.2d 4. In th......
-
Forgy v. Schwartz, 668
...and Highway Traffic § 359. 'Some allowance must be made for the excitement of the moment and strain on the nerves. ' Crowe v. Crowe, 259 N.C. 55, 129 S.E.2d 585. When 'the unexpected occurs, time must be allowed a driver, put in peril without his fault, to appreciate the danger and form a j......
- Spitzer v. Lewark, 19