{
  "id": 8607379,
  "name": "MABEL SMITH v. DICK MASON LUMBER COMPANY, INC. (Original Defendant) and PAUL QUEEN (Additional Defendant.)",
  "name_abbreviation": "Smith v. Dick Mason Lumber Co.",
  "decision_date": "1958-10-08",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "48",
  "last_page": "48",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "249 N.C. 48"
    }
  ],
  "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": 163,
    "char_count": 1899,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.568,
    "sha256": "127c60f153e8fca339fdf5953952888c7972f3b75b3a0e5db8c5542eee3f8135",
    "simhash": "1:9d93e83cc94899fb",
    "word_count": 295
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T22:25:15.863799+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "MABEL SMITH v. DICK MASON LUMBER COMPANY, INC. (Original Defendant) and PAUL QUEEN (Additional Defendant.)"
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "PeR CuRIam.\nThe only error asserted is the refusal of appellant\u2019s motion to nonsuit. An examination of the record discloses evidence sufficient to support the verdict. Conflicts in the evidence were solved by the jury. No new legal question is presented.\nNo Error.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "PeR CuRIam."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "0. A. Warren and Whitener & Mitchem for plaintiff, appellee.",
      "Garland & Garland for defendant, appellant.",
      "L. B. Iiollowell for additional defendant, appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "MABEL SMITH v. DICK MASON LUMBER COMPANY, INC. (Original Defendant) and PAUL QUEEN (Additional Defendant.)\n(Filed 8 October, 1958.)\nAppeal by original defendant from Sharp, S. J., May-June 1958 Civil Term of GastoN.\nThe complaint alleges plaintiff, a guesit of Paul Queen, was injured in a collision between Queen\u2019s truck and a truck of defendant lumber company, backed without adequate warning from a private entrance into the Gastonia-Dallas highway along which the Queen vehicle was traveling. The collision occurred about 6:30 a.m., 1 February 1957. The paved portion of the highway is 22 feet in width. It is alleged that appellant\u2019s vehicle was without lights. It was rainy, foggy, and dark. Visibility was limited to 50 feet according to plaintiff\u2019s testimony. Defendant\u2019s vehicle had been backed SO' as to occupy the entire width of the highway. Plaintiff seeks damages from the lumber company.\nOriginal defendant denied any negligence on its part causing injury to plaintiff but asserted if in fact it was negligent, Queen was likewise negligent, entitling it to contribution for any damages it was compelled to pay. On its motion Queen was made an additional defendant.\nResponding to appropriate issues, the jury found plaintiff was injured by the negligence of defendant lumber company, that Queen did not contribute thereto, and the amount of plaintiff\u2019s damage.\nJudgment was entered in conformity with the verdict. Defendant lumber company excepted and appealed.\n0. A. Warren and Whitener & Mitchem for plaintiff, appellee.\nGarland & Garland for defendant, appellant.\nL. B. Iiollowell for additional defendant, appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0048-01",
  "first_page_order": 90,
  "last_page_order": 90
}