{
  "id": 8626658,
  "name": "LESLIE ADAMS, by His Next Friend, MRS. MARY ADAMS, v. BLUE BIRD TAXIS, INC., and D. W. BLANKENSHIP",
  "name_abbreviation": "Adams ex rel. Adams v. Blue Bird Taxis, Inc.",
  "decision_date": "1937-03-17",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "324",
  "last_page": "325",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "211 N.C. 324"
    }
  ],
  "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": [],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 227,
    "char_count": 4011,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.508,
    "sha256": "f4dc823055bce464822cb251116e83b9cd1a9309490b7dbbca55d25a39053047",
    "simhash": "1:b061761d516ec0bc",
    "word_count": 669
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T22:38:14.990140+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "LESLIE ADAMS, by His Next Friend, MRS. MARY ADAMS, v. BLUE BIRD TAXIS, INC., and D. W. BLANKENSHIP."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "CoNNOn, J.\nA careful reading of the record in this appeal fails to disclose any evidence at the trial in the general county court of Buncombe County, tending to show the injuries which the plaintiff suffered when be was struck by an automobile, while riding on a bicycle on a public street in the city of Asbeville, were caused by the defendants or by either of them. Neither the plaintiff, who testified as a witness in bis own behalf, nor James Lowe, who testified that be was riding on the bicycle with the plaintiff when be was struck by an automobile and thrown from the bicycle to the street, identified the automobile owned by the defendant Blue Bird Taxis, Inc., and driven by the defendant D. \"W. Blankenship, as the automobile which struck the plaintiff. the accident occurred about 10 o\u2019clock at night, and at that time many automobiles were passing on the street where the accident occurred. the presence of defendants\u2019 automobile on the street near the place of the accident, after the accident occurred, did not alone support \u2019an inference that said automobile bad struck the plaintiff and caused him to be thrown to the street. All the evidence tended to show that defendants\u2019 automobile arrived on the scene after the accident.\nThe plaintiff failed to sustain the burden which the law imposed upon him to establish by evidence at the trial \u2014 the truth of bis allegations.\nThere was error in the ruling of the judge on defendants\u2019 assignment of error based upon their exception to the refusal of the trial court to dismiss the action by judgment of nonsuit. This assignment of error should have been sustained. The judgment is reversed and the action remanded to the Superior Court of Buncombe County, that judgment may be entered in said court in accordance with this opinion.\nReversed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "CoNNOn, J."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Carl W. Greene and Zeb V. Nettles for plaintiff.",
      "Weaver \u25a0& Miller and J. G. Cheesborough for defendants."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "LESLIE ADAMS, by His Next Friend, MRS. MARY ADAMS, v. BLUE BIRD TAXIS, INC., and D. W. BLANKENSHIP.\n(Filed 17 March, 1937.)\nAutomobiles \u00a7 18g \u2014 Evidence held insufficient to discharge plaintiff\u2019s burden of identifying defendant\u2019s car as the one causing the injury.\nEvidence that many automobiles were passing on the street at the time of the accident, and that the automobile owned by one defendant and operated by the other was on the street near the place of the accident after the accident occurred, without further evidence identifying the automobile as the one which struck the bicycle which plaintiff was riding, is held insufficient to resist defendants\u2019 motions to nonsuit, the burden being upon plaintiff to affirmatively establish the truth of his allegations.\nAppeal by defendants from Phillips, J., at November Term, 1936, of BttNcoMbe.\nBeversed.\nThis is an action to recover damages for personal injuries suffered by the plaintiff, and caused, as alleged in the complaint, by the negligence of the defendants.\nThe action was begun and tried in the general county court of Buncombe County.\nAt the trial, issues arising upon the pleadings were submitted to the jury and answered as follows :\n\u201c1. Was the plaintiff injured by the negligence of the defendants, as alleged in the complaint? Answer: \u2018Yesd\n\u201c2. Did the plaintiff by his own negligence contribute to his injuries as alleged in the answer? Answer: No.\u2019\n\u201c3. Wbat amount, if any, is tbe plaintiff entitled to recover of tbe defendants ? Answer: \u2018$1,450.\u2019 \u201d\nFrom judgment that plaintiff recover of tbe defendants tbe sum of $1,450 and tbe costs of tbe action, tbe defendants appealed to tbe judge of tbe Superior Court of Buncombe County, assigning numerous errors in tbe trial.\nAt tbe bearing of defendants\u2019 appeal, tbeir assignments of error were not sustained. Tbe judgment of tbe general county court was affirmed by tbe judge of tbe Superior Court. Tbe defendants appealed to tbe Supreme Court, assigning as errors tbe rulings of tbe judge of tbe Superior Court and bis judgment affirming tbe judgment of tbe general county court.\nCarl W. Greene and Zeb V. Nettles for plaintiff.\nWeaver \u25a0& Miller and J. G. Cheesborough for defendants."
  },
  "file_name": "0324-01",
  "first_page_order": 390,
  "last_page_order": 391
}