{ "id": 8617953, "name": "JOHN McLEOD v. LEXINGTON COCA-COLA BOTTLING COMPANY", "name_abbreviation": "McLeod v. Lexington Coca-Cola Bottling Co.", "decision_date": "1937-12-15", "docket_number": "", "first_page": "671", "last_page": "672", "citations": [ { "type": "official", "cite": "212 N.C. 671" } ], "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": "184 S. E., 834", "category": "reporters:state_regional", "reporter": "S.E.", "opinion_index": 0 }, { "cite": "209 N. C., 821", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "N.C.", "case_ids": [ 2221530 ], "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/nc/209/0821-01" ] }, { "cite": "182 S. E., 469", "category": "reporters:state_regional", "reporter": "S.E.", "opinion_index": 0 }, { "cite": "208 N. C., 751", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "N.C.", "case_ids": [ 8616928 ], "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/nc/208/0751-01" ] }, { "cite": "145 S. E., 14", "category": "reporters:state_regional", "reporter": "S.E.", "opinion_index": 0 }, { "cite": "196 N. C., 175", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "N.C.", "case_ids": [ 8625380 ], "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/nc/196/0175-01" ] }, { "cite": "180 S. E., 582", "category": "reporters:state_regional", "reporter": "S.E.", "opinion_index": 0 }, { "cite": "208 N. C., 305", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "N.C.", "case_ids": [ 8603974 ], "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/nc/208/0305-01" ] } ], "analysis": { "cardinality": 235, "char_count": 3471, "ocr_confidence": 0.501, "pagerank": { "raw": 6.132669919494288e-08, "percentile": 0.3817672381671673 }, "sha256": "ebefd2a18f6be37bb6468fcc8b0d9b1b3c985991ac5213ae67c74ad2d639dca2", "simhash": "1:c66302532e6e16fd", "word_count": 581 }, "last_updated": "2023-07-14T21:30:43.466662+00:00", "provenance": { "date_added": "2019-08-29", "source": "Harvard", "batch": "2018" }, "casebody": { "judges": [], "parties": [ "JOHN McLEOD v. LEXINGTON COCA-COLA BOTTLING COMPANY." ], "opinions": [ { "text": "Pee CubiaM.\nTaking the testimony in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, there is failure of proof requisite in cases of this character as set forth in Enloe v. Bottling Co., 208 N. C., 305, 180 S. E., 582, and cases therein cited. The bottled drink in question was \u201cginger ale.\u201d There is no evidence tending to show that in like products manufactured under substantially the same conditions and sold'by the defendant \u201cat about the same time\u201d contained foreign or deleterious substances. Perry v. Bottling Co., 196 N. C., 175, 145 S. E., 14; Enloe v. Bottling Co., supra; Blackwell v. Bottling Co., 208 N. C., 751, 182 S. E., 469; Collins v. Bottling Co., 209 N. C., 821, 184 S. E., 834.\nThe judgment below is\nAffirmed.", "type": "majority", "author": "Pee CubiaM." } ], "attorneys": [ "Phillips & Bower for plaintiff, appellant.", "Don A. Walser for defendant, appellee." ], "corrections": "", "head_matter": "JOHN McLEOD v. LEXINGTON COCA-COLA BOTTLING COMPANY.\n(Filed 15 December, 1937.)\nFood \u00a7 16 \u2014 Evidence of foreign substances in other kinds of di'inks bottled by defendant does not show negligence in bottling ginger ale causing injury.\nPlaintiff\u2019s evidence tended to show that he was injured by drinking foreign, deleterious substances in a bottle of ginger ale bottled by defendant, and that about the same time, foreign, deleterious substances were found in bottles of Coca-Cola and other \u201cbottled drinks\u201d prepared by defendant. Held: The evidence does not show that like products manufactured by defendant under substantially the same conditions contained foreign, deleterious substances, and defendant\u2019s motion to nonsuit was properly granted.\nAppeal by plaintiff from Sink, J., at May Term, 1937, of Dayidsopt.\nAction to recover damages for alleged actionable negligence.\nPlaintiff alleged and offered evidence tending to show that while operating a cafe in the city of Lexington, North Carolina, he bought \u201cbottled drinks\u201d from the defendant every morning; that on 27 January, 1937, he bought a crate of 24 bottles of ginger ale; that the same was delivered to him from a truck by Eoy Wallace, who works for the defendant; that later during the day Mr. Beck and Walt Warner were in the cafe. Beck bought a \u201cDr. Pepper,\u201d and at the same time plaintiff drank a part of the ginger ale from one of the bottles purchased by him that morning, and found in it a large green fly covered with fungus; that the bottle had not been opened or tampered with; that after drinking he became violently sick and has continued to suffer therefrom. Plaintiff further offered testimony tending to show that about this same time when people bought and drank \u201cbottled drinks\u201d in his cafe, he found a \u00f1y and match stems. He testified: \u201cI turned these bottles in which I found these substances in to Eoy Wallace, who works for the defendant company. The defendant replaced them with other bottles \u2014 full bottles\u201d; that he had opened \u201cbottled drinks\u201d three or four times and found foreign substances in them.\nPlaintiff further offered evidence tending to show that in \u201cSeptember a year ago\u201d in a bottle of Coca-Cola purchased from the defendant a green fly was found; and in March, 1937, in a bottle of Coca-Cola, likewise purchased from the defendant, there was found a fungus mass.\nPlaintiff offered in evidence a portion of the answer reading: \u201cThe defendant does not deny that it sold to the plaintiff bottled soda water about the time therein set out.\u201d\nFrom judgment as of nonsuit at the close of plaintiff\u2019s evidence, plaintiff appealed to the Supreme Court and assigned error.\nPhillips & Bower for plaintiff, appellant.\nDon A. Walser for defendant, appellee." }, "file_name": "0671-01", "first_page_order": 741, "last_page_order": 742 }