{
  "id": 8628597,
  "name": "H. B. STEPHENS v. BEN JOHNSON",
  "name_abbreviation": "Stephens v. Johnson",
  "decision_date": "1939-03-01",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "133",
  "last_page": "134",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "215 N.C. 133"
    }
  ],
  "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": "140 S. E., 730",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "194 N. C., 696",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8616637
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/194/0696-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "197 S. E., 539",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "213 N. C., 770",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8630558
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/213/0770-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 229,
    "char_count": 3037,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.454,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 7.685074478792301e-08,
      "percentile": 0.4531260316721168
    },
    "sha256": "88689cff8c10da09355ba67c0e2d1259dcdc238591f05e1d2d4eff96fe51417d",
    "simhash": "1:1ce6ad6f79539afb",
    "word_count": 512
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T22:25:15.554902+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "H. B. STEPHENS v. BEN JOHNSON."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Stacy, C. J.\nTbe following special instruction, given at tbe request of tbe plaintiff, forms tbe basis of one of defendant\u2019s exceptive assignments of error:\n\u201cThat if the driver of tbe Johnson car saw tbe Stephens truck approaching tbe intersection at a high or improper rate of speed, and notwithstanding this fact continued on into the intersection in an attempt to cross said highway ahead of tbe Stephens truck, such action on the part of tbe driver of the Johnson car would constitute negligence.\u201d\nThis instruction runs counter to tbe statute, cb. 407, Public Laws 1937, sec. 120, and is at variance with what was said in Sebastian v. Motor Lines, 213 N. C., 770, 197 S. E., 539. Eeference to the Sebastian case will suffice to make clear the error. It is also observed that tbe instruction omits any reference to proximate cause. Hurt v. Power Co., 194 N. C., 696, 140 S. E., 730.\nFor the error as indicated, a new trial must be awarded. It is so ordered.\nNew trial.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Stacy, C. J."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "0. L. Pemberton and Emerson T. Sanders for plaintiff, appellee.",
      "Glidewell & Glidewell for defendant, appellant."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "H. B. STEPHENS v. BEN JOHNSON.\n(Filed 1 March, 1939.)\n1. Automobiles \u00a7\u00a7 12e, 18h \u2014 Instruction that attempt to cross \u201cthrough highway\u201d intersection in front of truck driven at excessive speed constituted negligence per se held error.\nPlaintiff\u2019s truck was traveling along a \u201cthrough highway.\u201d Defendant was driving his car along an intersecting side road. The vehicles collided at the intersection, the front of the truck striking the side of defendant\u2019s ear. The court instructed the jury that if defendant saw the truck approaching the intersection at a high or improper rate of speed, and notwithstanding this fact continued on into the intersection in an attempt to cross said highway ahead of the truck, such action would constitute negligence. Held,: The instruction runs counter to the statute, ch. 407, sec. 120, Public Laws of 1937, and is error. Sebastian v. Motor Lines, 213 N. O., 770, cited as controlling.\n3. Automobiles \u00a7 18h: Negligence \u00a7 20\u2014\nIt is error for the charge on the issue of negligence involved in the case to omit any reference to proximate cause.\nAppeal by defendant from Clement, J., at November Term, 1938, of Caswell.\nCivil action to recover damages for injury to plaintiff\u2019s truck alleged to bave been caused by tbe negligent operation of defendant\u2019s automobile wben tbe two collided at tbe intersection of a dirt road known as Cobb Memorial School Road and Highway No. 158, the latter being designated as a \u201cThrough Highway.\u201d\nTbe plaintiff\u2019s truck was traveling easterly on Highway No. 158. Tbe defendant approached tbe intersection from tbe south, in bis Model T coupe, loaded with tobacco. \u201cIt looked like be speeded up and tried to beat me across,\u201d according to tbe testimony of tbe driver of tbe truck. The machines collided near the center of the road, tbe front of tbe truck striking tbe side of defendant\u2019s car.\nThere was a verdict and judgment for plaintiff, from which the defendant appeals, assigning errors.\n0. L. Pemberton and Emerson T. Sanders for plaintiff, appellee.\nGlidewell & Glidewell for defendant, appellant."
  },
  "file_name": "0133-01",
  "first_page_order": 199,
  "last_page_order": 200
}