{
  "id": 8569321,
  "name": "GLENN V. WALKER v. CONTINENTAL BAKING COMPANY; and G. B. BASS v. CONTINENTAL BAKING COMPANY; and HARVEY D. LEWIS v. GLENN V. WALKER and G. B. BASS",
  "name_abbreviation": "Walker v. Continental Baking Co.",
  "decision_date": "1964-09-30",
  "docket_number": "",
  "first_page": "534",
  "last_page": "536",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "262 N.C. 534"
    }
  ],
  "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": "82 N.C. 29",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8682211
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/82/0029-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "67 S.E. 2d 57",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "234 N.C. 222",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8621029
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/234/0222-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "106 S.E. 2d 232",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "opinion_index": 0
    },
    {
      "cite": "249 N.C. 271",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        8613472
      ],
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/249/0271-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 271,
    "char_count": 4434,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.564,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 8.333723658687896e-08,
      "percentile": 0.4805419157642009
    },
    "sha256": "f150946694c06a7274e59879311f687ed79974d2cdb39351263491e8624c39aa",
    "simhash": "1:b54404b576fc2192",
    "word_count": 729
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T22:57:24.361559+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "GLENN V. WALKER v. CONTINENTAL BAKING COMPANY. and G. B. BASS v. CONTINENTAL BAKING COMPANY. and HARVEY D. LEWIS v. GLENN V. WALKER and G. B. BASS."
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "PeR Cueiam.\nWalker alleged and testified in support of his allegations: The collision occurred about 1:00 p.m. He was traveling north on Highway No. 17, and in the eastern, his proper lane. He saw Continental\u2019s truck approaching. It was also in the eastern, the wrong lane. He blew his horn to alert Continental\u2019s driver. To avoid a collision, he, Walker, pulled to his right and on to the shoulder. Continental\u2019s driver was slumped over with his bead on the steering wheel. Seeing he could not avoid a collision by going further to the right, he turned to his left, but was unable to avoid a collision, which occurred in his lane of travel.\nWalker\u2019s description of the manner in'which the collision occurred was corroborated by a witness who testified he was traveling north and immediately behind Walker.\nLewis testified. He told how the collision occurred. His version contradicted the statements made by Walker and his witness. He said he was in his proper lane and that the collision occurred because Walker came into Lewis\u2019 lane. Lewis, to support his version, put on two witnesses who testified they saw the collision. Their testimony with respect to the manner in which the collision occurred supported Lewis\u2019 version.\nWalker\u2019s character, and the character of his witness, were attacked on cross examination by questions directed to their commission of criminal offenses.\nWalker and Bass assign as error the court\u2019s refusal to permit them to corroborate Walker\u2019s testimony by the testimony of the Highway Patrolman who investigated the collision. He arrived at the scene fifteen or twenty minutes after the collision occurred. His testimony, not permitted to go to the jury, was that Walker, at the scene of the collision, told him how the collision occurred and related the manner in which it occurred. The statements he attributed to Walker as to the cause of the collision were the same as given by Walker as a witness.\nThe patrolman\u2019s testimony was not offered as substantive evidence, but for the sole purpose of corroborating Walker. It was competent for that purpose. Stansbury\u2019s North Carolina Evidence (2d Ed.), sec. 51, and cases assembled in note 63. We are of the opinion that the exclusion of the evidence was prejudicial. State v. Brown, 249 N.C. 271, 106 S.E. 2d 232; Jackson v. Sanitarium, 234 N.C. 222, 67 S.E. 2d 57; Roberts v. Roberts, 82 N.C. 29.\nNew trial.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "PeR Cueiam."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Hogue, Hill and Rowe, Addison Hewlett, Jr., for appellants.",
      "James, James & Crossley for appellees."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "GLENN V. WALKER v. CONTINENTAL BAKING COMPANY. and G. B. BASS v. CONTINENTAL BAKING COMPANY. and HARVEY D. LEWIS v. GLENN V. WALKER and G. B. BASS.\n(Filed 30 September, 1964.)\nEvidence \u00a7 55\u2014\nWhere a party has testified as to bis version of the accident, an officer, who arrived at the scene some 15 or 20 minutes after the accident occurred, should be permitted to testify in corroboration that the party at that time made statements of the same import in regard to how the accident occurred, and the exclusion of the corroborative evidence is error.\nAppeals by Glenn V. Walker and G. B. Bass from Mintz, J., June 1964 Civil Term of New HaNOver.\nOn June 12, 1963, there was a collision between a truck owned by G. B. Bass and a truck owned by Continental Baking Company. The Bass truck was driven by Glenn V. Walker; Continental\u2019s truck was driven by Harvey Lewis. Walker sued Continental, alleging personal injuries sustained in the collision caused by the negligence of Continental\u2019s driver, engaged in his 'employer\u2019s business. Bass sued Continental to recover damages he sustained as a result of the collision.\nContinental denied the negligence alleged by Walker. It pleaded contributory negligence and, for affirmative relief, asserted a counterclaim for damages to its truck. Continental, in the action brought by Bass, did not assert a counterclaim. It merely denied the alleged negligence of Lewis and asserted Walker\u2019s contributory negligence.\nLewis brought an action for personal injuries sustained by him in the collision.\nThe cases were consolidated for trial. The jury, on appropriate issues submitted to it, found that Lewis, Continental\u2019s driver, was not negligent; that Walker was contributorily negligent; and in Lewis\u2019 case, that Walker was negligent, that Lewis was not contributorily negligent, and fixed the amount of damages sustained by Continental and Lewis. Judgments were entered on the verdicts. Walker and Bass appealed.\nHogue, Hill and Rowe, Addison Hewlett, Jr., for appellants.\nJames, James & Crossley for appellees."
  },
  "file_name": "0534-01",
  "first_page_order": 578,
  "last_page_order": 580
}