{
  "id": 8622966,
  "name": "J. A. TAYLOR, Administrator, v. H. T. CAUDLE, Administrator",
  "name_abbreviation": "Taylor v. Caudle",
  "decision_date": "1936-04-29",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "60",
  "last_page": "62",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "210 N.C. 60"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "N.C.",
    "id": 9292,
    "name": "Supreme Court of North Carolina"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 5,
    "name_long": "North Carolina",
    "name": "N.C."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "178 S. E., 601",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "207 N. C., 787",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8628584
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/207/0787-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "36 A. L. R., 1128",
      "category": "reporters:specialty",
      "reporter": "A.L.R.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "140 N. E., 338",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "N.E.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "107 Ohio St., 501",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ohio St.",
      "case_ids": [
        970976
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ohio-st/107/0501-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "111 S. E., 714",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "183 N. C., 340",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8656200
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/183/0340-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "116 S. E., 742",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "185 N. C., 292",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8655941
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/185/0292-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "166 S. E., 330",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "203 N. C., 439",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8612648
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/203/0439-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 279,
    "char_count": 3836,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.464,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 1.2347580431945775e-07,
      "percentile": 0.6064776363409604
    },
    "sha256": "5c98be903c768f714fdc75eb940fb2ba4a5af85149110f433121a898330d0429",
    "simhash": "1:7bd3f69a66beb1d8",
    "word_count": 660
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T17:57:05.250790+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "J. A. TAYLOR, Administrator, v. H. T. CAUDLE, Administrator."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Stacy, C. J.\nThe liability of the owner of the car is predicated upon his alleged negligence in intrusting his automobile to a reckless and incompetent driver, one given to habitual and excessive use of liquor, and known to be irresponsible or untrustworthy. Eller v. Dent, 203 N. C., 439, 166 S. E., 330; Robertson v. Aldridge, 185 N. C., 292, 116 S. E., 742; Tyree v. Tudor, 183 N. C., 340, 111 S. E., 714; Elliott v. Harding, 107 Ohio St., 501, 140 N. E., 338; 36 A. L. R., 1128. There was ample evidence to support this allegation.\nWhile it would seem the jury might .well have answered the issue of contributory negligence in favor of the defendant, in view of the evidence tending to show plaintiff\u2019s intestate\u2019s knowledge of Byrum\u2019s general reputation and character as a reckless and unsafe driver, still there is evidence to the contrary, and the issue was one for the twelve. Lincoln v. R. R., 207 N. C., 787, 178 S. E., 601.\nThe record presents no exceptive assignment of error upon which a new trial could be awarded, hence the result will not be disturbed.\nNo error.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Stacy, C. J."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "H. G. J ones and Brock Barkley for plaintiff.",
      "M. K. Hamll and J. F. Newell for defendant."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "J. A. TAYLOR, Administrator, v. H. T. CAUDLE, Administrator.\n(Filed 29 April, 1936.)\n1. Automobiles E a \u2014 Owner o\u00ed car is negligent in permitting reckless, incompetent person to drive liis car.\nEvidence that the owner of an automobile permitted a person to drive the car who was a, reckless and incompetent driver and given to the habitual and excessive use of liquor is held sufficient to be submitted to the jury on the issue of the owner\u2019s negligence in permitting such person to drive Ms car.\nS. Automobiles D a: Trial D a \u2014 Conflicting evidence held to raise issue of fact for jury on question of contributory negligence of guest.\nConflicting evidence as to whether plaintiff\u2019s intestate knew the general reputation of the driver of the car as reckless and incompetent and addicted to drink when intestate got into the car as such driver\u2019s guest is held, to raise an issue of fact for the jury on the question of intestate\u2019s contributory negligence.\nAppeal by defendant from Shaw, Emergency Judge, at January Special Term, 1936, of MecKleNbueg.\nCivil action to recover damages for death of plaintiffs intestate, alleged to have been caused by the wrongful act, neglect, or default of defendant\u2019s intestate.\nThe case was tried upon allegation and evidence tending to show that on 2 October, 1932, plaintiff\u2019s intestate, a boy sixteen years of age, was killed while riding in an automobile owned by George B. Caudle and negligently driven at the time by Hunter Byrum. It is in evidence that Byrum was a reckless and incompetent driver, given to habitual and excessive use of liquor, and that Caudle permitted him to drive his car, knowing him to be such a person. It is further in evidence that the driver of the Caudle car, in attempting to go around another car, on a rough and dusty road in Montgomery County, at a speed of sixty miles an hour, ran off the road into the ditch, hit a stump, turned the car over, and killed plaintiff\u2019s intestate.\nThe coroner and undertaker testified that they smelled whiskey on Hunter Byrum\u2019s breath soon after the accident.\nUnder defendant\u2019s plea of contributory negligence, there was evidence tending to show that plaintiff\u2019s intestate was driving the Caudle car at the time of the injury; also that he suggested the ride in question; and that Hunter Byrum\u2019s reputation as a reckless and unsafe driver was known to plaintiff\u2019s intestate before starting upon the fatal trip.\nThere was evidence in rebuttal on behalf of the plaintiff.\nThe usual issues of negligence, contributory negligence, and damages were submitted to the jury and answered in favor of plaintiffs. From judgment thereon defendant appeals, assigning errors.\nH. G. J ones and Brock Barkley for plaintiff.\nM. K. Hamll and J. F. Newell for defendant."
  },
  "file_name": "0060-01",
  "first_page_order": 126,
  "last_page_order": 128
}