Sams v. Hotel Raleigh Inc

Decision Date24 January 1934
Docket NumberNo. 377.,377.
Citation172 S.E. 371,205 N. C. 758
PartiesSAMS. v. HOTEL RALEIGH, Inc.
CourtNorth Carolina Supreme Court

Appeal from Superior Court, Wake County; Cranmer, Judge.

Action by Maud Sams against the Hotel Raleigh, Inc. From a judgment of nonsuit, plaintiff appeals.

Affirmed.

The plaintiff had a room in the defendant hotel and alleged that on January 30, 1933, at about the hour of 9:30 p. m. she came out of her room on the third floor of said hotel with the intention of descending the stairs between the third and second floors for the purpose of going to the room of the assistant manager of said hotel, who was ill, to inquire as to his condition and to secure the teaspoons from his tray which would be needed for his early breakfast; said meal to be furnished from the coffee shop operated by this plaintiff; that plaintiff had descended within about seven steps of the second floor when the heel of her left shoe becamecaught and hung in the edge of a metal strip which the defendant had tacked on the outer edge of one of the steps of said stairs for the purpose of holding the carpet firmly on said stairs; that the defendant had carelessly, recklessly, and negligently allowed the said metal strip to protrude upward on the step to such an extent that a person's shoe might be caught in the knifelike edge thereof; that the heel of plaintiff's left shoe caught in the edge of said metal strip so firmly that the shoe was forced off plaintiff's foot and the heel off the shoe; that the tripping over the protruding edge of said metal strip caused her to lose her balance and to fall down the remaining six steps on the way to the second floor.

Plaintiff testified: "I thought the steps were all right and as I stepped down my foot caught. I grabbed and tried to release my foot and heel. The brass strip caught in my heel and as I went to release my foot my heel pulled down and caught underneath my instep. It is nothing unusual to have brass strips on the edge of steps. The brass, according to my best judgment, extended about one inch from the outer edge. I don't think there was anything unusual about the width of the steps, just like all steps going down in hotels and everywhere else. There was nothing unusual in their construction. * * * I did not have my hand on the rail then because I don't usually hold a rail as I go down, but when my foot caught I grabbed the handrailing. I stopped when I grabbed the handrailing to release my foot. Then the strip went in to my heel. * * * While Mr. Robinson was sick I had used the steps that I fell on. I believe the steps are about the same in the day as the night. I used them up and down. I think they are lighted as well in the day time as the night and the night as well as in the day time. I cannot say I ever noticed anything wrong with the steps on the numerous occasions I had used them. * * * I had never observed anything in the world wrong with them. I had never noticed anything being loose on the steps. I was rushing up to see how he was. On going back to my business * * * I went up those identical steps practically every day while Mr. Robinson was sick. I did not notice anything wrong about the steps. I did not observe anything loose."

There was evidence that the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
5 cases
  • Harris v. Montgomery Ward & Co.
    • United States
    • North Carolina Supreme Court
    • May 25, 1949
    ...Ward & Co., 217 N.C. 368, 8 S.E.2d 199, 201; Fox v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co., 209 N.C. 115, 182 S.E. 662; Sams v. Hotel Raleigh, 205 N.C. 758, 172 S.E. 371; Cooke v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea 204 N.C. 495, 168 S.E. 679; Parker v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co., supra; Bohannan ......
  • Barnes v. Hotel O. Henry Corp.
    • United States
    • North Carolina Supreme Court
    • January 7, 1949
    ... ... guests or invitees warning of any hidden peril. Schwingle ... v. Kellenberger, 217 N.C. 577, 8 S.E.2d 918; Sams v ... Hotel Raleigh, 205 N.C. 758, 172 S.E. 371; Jones v ... Bland, 182 N.C. 70, 108 S.E. 334, 16 A.L.R. 1383; ... Patrick v. Springs, 154 N.C ... ...
  • Emerson v. Great Atlantic and Pac. Tea Co., Inc.
    • United States
    • North Carolina Court of Appeals
    • June 19, 1979
    ...to show (a) defective or negligent construction or maintenance; (b) express or implied notice of such defects. Sams v. Hotel Raleigh, Inc., 205 N.C. 758, 172 S.E. 371 (1934). Plaintiff contends that the documents before the trial court at the summary judgment hearing establish a triable iss......
  • Schwingle v. Kellenberger
    • United States
    • North Carolina Supreme Court
    • May 22, 1940
    ...sustained. In this we can see no error. Speaking to the subject of the duty imposed upon owners to invitees, in Sams v. Hotel Raleigh, 205 N.C. 758, 760, 172 S.E. 371, 372, it is written: "In order to establish a breach of duty so imposed, the injured party must offer evidence tending to sh......
  • 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