Pugh v. Smith, 398
| Decision Date | 27 November 1957 |
| Docket Number | No. 398,398 |
| Citation | 100 S.E.2d 503,247 N.C. 264 |
| Parties | John D. PUGH v. Herman Leo SMITH. |
| Court | North Carolina Supreme Court |
Fred M. Parrish, Jr., McKeithen, Graves, & Robinson, Winston-Salem, by Norwood Robinson, Winston-Salem, for plaintiffappellant.
Ratcliff, Vaughn, Hudson, Ferrell & Carter, Winston-Salem, by Ralph M. Stockton, Jr., Winston-Salem, for defendant-appellee.
Throughout the charge the court instructed the jury that in order to prevail on the first issue (defendant's negligence) the plaintiff must establish by the greater weight of the evidence that the defendant was negligent and that his negligence was the proximate cause of the plaintiff's injury. The charge placed too great a burden upon the plaintiff. A similar error is treated at length in the case of Price v. Gray, 246 N.C. 162, 97 S.E.2d 844.
When the pleadings and the evidence involve the negligence of a person other than the defendant, it is only necessary for the plaintiff to show the defendant's negligence was one of the proximate causes of the injury. In this case the negligence of both parties is involved. If either can prove by the greater weight of the evidence that the other's negligence was one of the proximate causes of the injury, he is entitled to have the appropriate issue answered in his favor. Each party is entitled to an equal chance before the jury. Each should carry an equal burden. On the authority of Price v. Gray, supra, and the cases there cited, this case is remanded to the Superior Court of Forsyth County for a
New trial.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Warren v. Parks
...proximate causes and that a finding of negligence on the part of one person does not necessarily exculpate the others. Pugh v. Smith, 247 N.C. 264, 100 S.E.2d 503 (1957); Price v. Gray, supra; Gentile v. Wilson, 242 N.C. 704, 89 S.E.2d 403 Had there been a proper, thorough instruction on pr......
- Spurlock v. Alexander
-
Spencer Spirit Holdings, Inc. v. Sunrise Roofing, Inc.
...Carolina law, "there may be two or more proximate causes of an injury." Batts v. Faggart, 260 N.C. 641, 644 (1963); see also Pugh v. Smith, 247 N.C. 264, 265 (1957) (stating that "it is only necessary for the plaintiff to show that the defendant's negligence was one of the proximate causes ......
-
Richardson v. Grayson, 395
...injury. This constitutes prejudicial error within the rulings in Price v. Gray, 246 N.C. 162, 97 S.E.2d 844, and Pugh v. Smith, 247 N.C. 264, 100 S.E.2d 503. Hence on authority of the holding of the opinions of this Court in these two cases, there must be a new trial. Therefore it is deemed......