{
  "id": 11300753,
  "name": "J. K. ABSHER, by His Next Friend. W. R. ABSHER, v. RUFUS MILLER and GRADY MILLER",
  "name_abbreviation": "Absher ex rel. Absher v. Miller",
  "decision_date": "1941-10-15",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "197",
  "last_page": "198",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "220 N.C. 197"
    }
  ],
  "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": "86 S. E., 804",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "170 N. C., 48",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8657029
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/170/0048-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "143 S. E., 536",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "195 N. C., 699",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8631574
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/195/0699-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "177 S. E., 13",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "207 N. C., 358",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8625951
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/207/0358-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "189 S. E., 177",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "211 N. C., 113",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8624575
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/211/0113-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 188,
    "char_count": 2424,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.47,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.03580807328026e-08,
      "percentile": 0.23955354153852212
    },
    "sha256": "717ec039b8e3340464b44c7077fa5d7392c5ca39e6a8c378f39b56c0219b83b2",
    "simhash": "1:a95d39c0b219841f",
    "word_count": 420
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T14:44:04.432821+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "J. K. ABSHER, by His Next Friend. W. R. ABSHER, v. RUFUS MILLER and GRADY MILLER."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "DeviN, J.\nThe defendants in their answer set up the defense of contributory negligence, and in apt time tendered an issue addressed to that question, which the court declined to submit. The court also instructed the jury that the plaintiff, due to his tender years, could not be guilty of contributory negligence.\nThere was evidence tending to support the defendants\u2019 allegation of negligence on the part of the plaintiff, and the father of the plaintiff testified that at the time of the injury the plaintiff was eight years old lacking a few days, and that he was a bright boy.\nWe are constrained to hold that the court below was in error in the ruling complained of, and that the issue of contributory negligence should have been submitted, with appropriate instruction, under the rule laid down in Boykin v. R. R., 211 N. C., 113, 189 S. E., 177; Morris v. Sprott, 207 N. C., 358, 177 S. E., 13; Brown v. R. R., 195 N. C., 699, 143 S. E., 536; Foard v. Power Co., 170 N. C., 48, 86 S. E., 804.\nThe defendants\u2019 motion for judgment of nonsuit was properly denied, but for the error pointed out there must be a\nNew trial.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "DeviN, J."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "W. H. McFlwee for plaintiff, appellee.",
      "Trivette & Holshouser for defendants, appellants."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "J. K. ABSHER, by His Next Friend. W. R. ABSHER, v. RUFUS MILLER and GRADY MILLER.\n(Filed 15 October, 1941.)\nNegligence \u00a7 12: Automobiles \u00a7 7\u2014\nPlaintiff was injured as be ran across tbe road in front of defendants\u2019 automobile. Tbe evidence tended to show that plaintiff lacked only a few days being eight years old and was a bright boy. Held: The issue of contributory negligence should have been submitted to the jury under appropriate instructions, and the court\u2019s instruction that plaintiff, due to his tender years, could not be guilty of contributory negligence is error.\nAppeal by defendants from Phillips, J., at April-May Term, 1941, of Wilkes.\nNew trial.\nThis was an action to recover damages for personal injury alleged to have been caused the plaintiff by the negligence of the defendants in the operation of an automobile. The plaintiff, a child eight years of age, was struck and injured as he ran across the road in front of defendants' moving automobile. There was evidence tending to show that the defendants\u2019 car was being driven negligently.\nIssues of negligence and damage were submitted to the jury and answered in favor of the plaintiff, and from judgment on the verdict defendants appealed.\nW. H. McFlwee for plaintiff, appellee.\nTrivette & Holshouser for defendants, appellants."
  },
  "file_name": "0197-01",
  "first_page_order": 241,
  "last_page_order": 242
}