Strickland v. Hughes

Decision Date18 September 1968
Docket NumberNo. 6822SC351,6822SC351
CitationStrickland v. Hughes, 163 S.E.2d 24, 2 N.C.App. 395 (N.C. App. 1968)
PartiesRonald Wayne STRICKLAND, by his Next Friend, W. H. Steed v. Leslie HUGHES.
CourtNorth Carolina Court of Appeals

Charles F. Lambeth, Jr., Thomasville, for plaintiffappellant.

Frank P. Holton, Jr., Lexington, for defendantappellee.

BROCK, Judge.

The plaintiff's evidence when viewed in the light most favorable to him tends to show the following: Plaintiff was the owner of the 1963 Chevrolet being driven by the defendant on the occasion in question.On 13 August 1965, plaintiff was tried in Thomasville Recorder's Court upon a charge of reckless driving, and upon conviction the Court had required him to surrender his driver's license.Plaintiff's cousin, Jimmy Honeycutt, drove plaintiff's car from the courthouse to defendant's place of business.Defendant then began driving plaintiff's car, and, after completing several errands around Thomasville, defendant drove to the community of Silver Valley looking for someone who had previously done some work for defendant.They had started back to Thomasville at the time of the accident.Defendant had been driving at reasonable speeds, but about one quarter of a mile before the accident defendant accelerated to a speed of 70 or 80 miles per hour.As the vehicle was going into a curve in the road it skidded on loose gravel, overturned, and injured plaintiff.Plaintiff did not say anything to defendant about the speed.He testified: 'I didn't have time to make objection then to the way he was driving.I didn't ask him to slow down or anything.'

At a speed of 70 miles per hour a car will travel one quarter of a mile in about 12.8 seconds.Therefore, the negligence of the defendant existed for only 12.8 seconds according to plaintiff's evidence.Obviously, even this short span of time would be sufficient to allow a person to say 'slow down' or some similar brief phrase.But the question is not how quickly a passenger Could react and admonish the driver to slow down.The question is whether the passenger exercised that degree of care for his own safety that a reasonably prudent person would employ under the same or similar circumstances.

A driver's negligence Is not imputed to an owner-passenger of an automobile, as that word is ordinarily used in the law of negligence, when the owner-passenger sues the driver for injuries resulting from the driver's negligence.However, in actions between the owner and parties other than the driver, the rule...

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
3 cases
  • Meadows v. Cigar Supply Co., Inc.
    • United States
    • North Carolina Court of Appeals
    • September 20, 1988
    ...have exercised under the same or similar circumstances, is ordinarily a question for jury determination." Strickland v. Hughes, 2 N.C.App. 395, 397, 163 S.E.2d 24, 26 (1968). The record in this case does not support a finding as a matter of law that defendant did not breach its duty. The is......
  • Etheridge v. Norfolk Southern Ry. Co.
    • United States
    • North Carolina Court of Appeals
    • January 12, 1970
    ...the driver in cases where the owner-occupant 'sues the driver for injuries resulting from the driver's negligence.' Strickland v. Hughes, 2 N.C.App. 395, 163 S.E.2d 24. In such cases, contributory negligence must be established to bar recovery. Sorrell v. Moore, 251 N.C. 852, 112 S.E.2d 254......
  • State v. Green
    • United States
    • North Carolina Court of Appeals
    • September 18, 1968