{
  "id": 2219459,
  "name": "MARVIN SHINAULT, Administrator of JIMMIE FRANKLIN SHINAULT, Deceased, v. CURTIS W. CREED",
  "name_abbreviation": "Shinault v. Creed",
  "decision_date": "1956-05-23",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "217",
  "last_page": "218",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "244 N.C. 217"
    }
  ],
  "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": 216,
    "char_count": 2880,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.494,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 1.0892527184265933e-07,
      "percentile": 0.5652271618924501
    },
    "sha256": "43e7cd875c76339ef4f1dd5ef39c947452bd11e5ed1ae803b3b8274995702e35",
    "simhash": "1:cc273344a9a68695",
    "word_count": 474
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T15:53:24.689887+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "MARVIN SHINAULT, Administrator of JIMMIE FRANKLIN SHINAULT, Deceased, v. CURTIS W. CREED."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Per Curiam.\nNo negligence is presumed from the mere fact that plaintiff\u2019s intestate was run over, and killed by the defendant. The evidence, when considered in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, and giving to him the benefit of every reasonable inference to be drawn therefrom, fails to disclose any negligence on defendant\u2019s part, and, in particular, fails to show that the defendant by the exercise of reasonable care could have discovered the perilous plight of the deceased and his incapacity to escape therefrom before he ran over him.\nTh\u00e9 judgment of nonsuit below is\nAffirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Per Curiam."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Allen, Henderson & Williams and Folger & Folger for Plaintiff, Appellant.",
      "Deal, Hutchins & Minor for Defendant, Appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "MARVIN SHINAULT, Administrator of JIMMIE FRANKLIN SHINAULT, Deceased, v. CURTIS W. CREED.\n(Filed 23 May, 1956.)\nAutomobiles \u00a7\u00a7 33, 411\u2014\nNonsuit was properly entered upon evidence tending to show that intestate was lying prostrate on the highway very early on a foggy morning, and that defendant\u2019s ear ran over intestate and killed him about the time it passed another car traveling in the opposite direction, with further evidence that defendant was driving at a lawful speed and stopped his ear a distance of about a car\u2019s length after running over intestate, since the evidence fails to disclose any negligence on defendant\u2019s part or that by the exercise of reasonable care he should have discovered intestate\u2019s perilous plight and incapacity before striking him.\nAppeal by plaintiff from Rousseau, J., February Term 1956 of Surry.\nAction by administrator to recover damages for alleged wrongful death. , '\nPlaintiff\u2019s intestate, 18 years of age, about 4:45 a.m., on 6 September 1954, was lying prostrate on the Shoals Road on the defendant\u2019s side of the highway and with his head about a foot from the center line. The morning was foggy. The fog was low on the road, and at the point where the body of the deceased was lying the fog was heavy enough \u201cto obscure the vision of an automobile approaching at a distance.\u201d The road was straight. The defendant was driving his automobile 25 to 30 miles an hour and was meeting an automobile driven by Paul Bullington, who was going 40 to 45 miles an hour. It was stipulated that the speed regulation at the scene was 55 miles per hour. Bullington had just come out of a curve, and straightened out. Both dimmed their lights. About the time these two automobiles passed each other, the defendant\u2019s automobile ran over and killed plaintiff\u2019s intestate. Defendant\u2019s car came practically to a stop after running over deceased. The defendant stopped his automobile in a distance of about the length of a car. There were no skid marks on the road.\nAt the close of the plaintiff\u2019s evidence, the court sustained the defendant\u2019s motion for judgment of nonsuit.\nFrom judgment of nonsuit, the plaintiff appealed, assigning error.\nAllen, Henderson & Williams and Folger & Folger for Plaintiff, Appellant.\nDeal, Hutchins & Minor for Defendant, Appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0217-01",
  "first_page_order": 263,
  "last_page_order": 264
}