Liske v. Walton

Decision Date28 May 1930
Docket NumberNo. 526.,526.
Citation153 S.E. 318
CourtNorth Carolina Supreme Court
PartiesLISKE. v. WALTON.

Appeal from Superior Court, Rowan County; Stack, Judge.

Action by P. J. Liske against W. L. Walton. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals.

New trial.

The plaintiff offered evidence tending to show that his car was being driven by his wife, in a careful and prudent manner, down Fulton street in the city of Salisbury, and that the defendant drove into said highway from Wiley avenue at a reckless, dangerous, and unlawful rate of speed in disregard of a stop sign. The plaintiff also offered evidence tending to show that after the collision the defendant stated: "I will admit I was in the wrong. Go ahead and settle it and keep it quiet." The defendant offered evidence tending to show that he approached the intersection of Wiley street at a speed of not more than fifteen miles an hour, and that the plaintiff's car was approaching the intersection "coming at a terrible rate of speed about fifty feet from me, and I stopped dead still and cut my car to the left as far as I could." The defendant further testified that the bumper of his car was not over four feet in the intersection at the time of the collision. There was other testimony that the plaintiff's car was approaching the intersection at a speed of forty or forty-five miles an hour.

The defendant's version of his conversation with the plaintiff after the collision was entirely different from that testified to by the plaintiff.

Issues of negligence and damages were submitted to the jury and answered in favor of plaintiff, who recovered $300.

From judgment upon the verdict, the defendant appealed.

Rendleman & Rendleman, of Salisbury, for appellant.

W. V. Harris and Clyde E. Gooch, both of Salisbury, for appellee.

BROGDEN, J.

The court charged the jury as follows: "The defendant sets up contributory negligence and alleges that the plaintiff's wife was guilty of contributory negligence. The court does not recall any evidence that would warrant you in passing on such issue, and therefore does not submit an issue as to that." The defendant in apt time rendered an issueas to contributory negligence, which was refused, and to the refusal of the court to submit an issue of contributory negligence and to the charge as set out, the defendant excepted and assigned the same as error.

Stacy, C. J., writing in Davis v. Jeffreys, 197 N. C. 712, 150 S. E. 488, 489, said: "Contributory negligence, such as will...

To continue reading

Request your trial
5 cases
  • Pettes v. Jones.
    • United States
    • New Mexico Supreme Court
    • March 29, 1937
    ...988; Smirnoff v. McNerney, 112 Conn. 421, 152 A. 399; Fulton v. Chouteau County Farmers' Co., 98 Mont. 48, 37 P.(2d) 1025; Liske v. Walton, 198 N.C. 741, 153 S.E. 318; Sharp v. Russell, 37 Ohio App. 306, 174 N.E. 617; Chapman v. Blackmore, 39 Ohio App. 425, 177 N.E. 772; Price v. Gabel, 162......
  • Spivey v. Newman
    • United States
    • North Carolina Supreme Court
    • June 9, 1950
    ...735; Robertson v. Carolina Taxi Service, Inc., 214 N.C. 624, 200 S.E. 363; Cashatt v. Brown, 211 N.C. 367, 190 S.E. 480; Liske v. Walton, 198 N.C. 741, 153 S.E. 318; Davis v. Jeffreys, 197 N.C. 712, 150 S.E. 488; Bailey v. Black Mountain R. Co., 196 N.C. 515, 146 S.E. 135; Elder v. Plaza Ry......
  • Simpson v. Curry
    • United States
    • North Carolina Supreme Court
    • February 25, 1953
    ...defendant, except that in an action like the present, the negligence of the plaintiff is called contributory negligence. Liske v. Walton, 198 N.C. 741, 153 S.E. 318. The criterion for establishing both is the same.' Sebastian v. Hourton Motor Lines, In Citizens Nat. Bank v. Phillips, supra,......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT