{
  "id": 8625512,
  "name": "LENA HARRINGTON v. LEE WALTER TAYLOR",
  "name_abbreviation": "Harrington v. Taylor",
  "decision_date": "1946-11-27",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "769",
  "last_page": "770",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "226 N.C. 769"
    }
  ],
  "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": "217 N. C., 82",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8598957
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/217/0082-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "225 N. C., 690",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8617006
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/225/0690-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 159,
    "char_count": 1664,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.476,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 4.03580807328026e-08,
      "percentile": 0.20724644564219769
    },
    "sha256": "31e94b406291913bd198d14688347e0e90c2e4d7a96105bfc98dd075c3e2a478",
    "simhash": "1:fac83a7ffe1a8469",
    "word_count": 286
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T21:52:42.041183+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "LENA HARRINGTON v. LEE WALTER TAYLOR."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Per Curiam.\nTbe action is against the defendant and not his wife who inflicted the injury. The plaintiff first sued on contract \u2014 defendant\u2019s promise to pay damages \u2014 reported in 225 N. C., 690, 36 S. E. (2d), 227. She now sues in tort.\nThe evidence is wanting in sufficiency to carry the case to the jury. The injury is not one which the defendant could have reasonably foreseen or anticipated. Butner v. Spease, 217 N. C., 82, 6 S. E. (2d), 808. The judgment of nonsuit will be upheld.\nAffirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Per Curiam."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "George S. Steele, Jr., for plaintiff, appellant.",
      "Fred W. Bynum for defendant, appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "LENA HARRINGTON v. LEE WALTER TAYLOR.\n(Filed 27 November, 1946.)\nNegligence \u00a7 9\u2014\nEvidence that plaintiff interposed herself between defendant and his assailant in a fight, and was injured by the blow intended for defendant, is insufficient to take the case to the jury on the issue of negligence since defendant could not have reasonably foreseen or anticipated the injury.\nAppeal, by plaintiff from Stevens, J., at May Term, 1946, of RICHMOND.\nCivil action to recover damages for personal injuries alleged to have been caused by the negligence of the defendant.\nOn 8 January, 1945, defendant went to the home of the plaintiff to get his wife who had gone there for protection. The defendant and his wife fell to fighting in the plaintiff\u2019s house. The defendant\u2019s wife had floored him with an axe and had it raised to strike him again when the plaintiff intervened and saved his life, but received a severe cut on the hand when she \u201cgot the lick which was intended for him.\u201d\nFrom judgment of nonsuit, entered at the close of plaintiff\u2019s evidence, she appeals, assigning errors.\nGeorge S. Steele, Jr., for plaintiff, appellant.\nFred W. Bynum for defendant, appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0769-01",
  "first_page_order": 817,
  "last_page_order": 818
}