{
  "id": 2402251,
  "name": "JOHNNY E. PINKSTON v. JAMES EDWARD CONNOR",
  "name_abbreviation": "Pinkston v. Connor",
  "decision_date": "1984-01-10",
  "docket_number": "No. 491A83",
  "first_page": "148",
  "last_page": "149",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "310 N.C. 148"
    }
  ],
  "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": "306 S.E. 2d 132",
      "category": "reporters:state_regional",
      "reporter": "S.E.2d",
      "year": 1983,
      "opinion_index": -1
    },
    {
      "cite": "63 N.C. App. 628",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C. App.",
      "case_ids": [
        8525959
      ],
      "year": 1983,
      "opinion_index": -1,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc-app/63/0628-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 145,
    "char_count": 1521,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.805,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 7.345432909102182e-08,
      "percentile": 0.44052143580571684
    },
    "sha256": "a2b11dfa131e1e19cdb4aba5345f6b8e94abb4d44aaeb5d13b274c382ce821df",
    "simhash": "1:a27f6c6b3a65543f",
    "word_count": 233
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T22:57:26.657763+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "JOHNNY E. PINKSTON v. JAMES EDWARD CONNOR"
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "PER CURIAM.\nPlaintiff, a city maintenance worker, sought damages for personal injuries resulting from defendant\u2019s negligent operation of his motor vehicle. The trial court refused to submit to the jury the issues of plaintiffs contributory negligence and the Town of Mooresville\u2019s concurring negligence.\nThe Court of Appeals determined that the trial court properly declined to submit the issue of plaintiffs contributory negligence since defendant failed to present sufficient evidence to support even an inference of that defense. Accordingly, the only basis upon which the Town could be held liable was through the acts or omissions of the plaintiff; thus, the decision favoring the plaintiff precludes any action against the Town.\nThe opinion of the Court of Appeals affirming the judgment for the plaintiff is affirmed.\nAffirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "PER CURIAM."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Kluttz, Hamlin, Reamer, Blankenship and Kluttz by Richard R. Reamer, for defendant-appellant.",
      "Pope and Brawley by William R. Pope, for defendant-appellee, Town of Mooresville.",
      "Wardlow, Knox, Knox, Freeman & Scofield by Charles E. Knox and John S. Freeman, for plaintiff-appellee."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "JOHNNY E. PINKSTON v. JAMES EDWARD CONNOR\nNo. 491A83\n(Filed 10 January 1984)\nDEFENDANT appeals pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. \u00a7 7A-30 from the decision of the Court of Appeals (Judges Hill and Becton concurring, Judge Webb dissenting), reported in 63 N.C. App. 628, 306 S.E. 2d 132 (1983), which affirmed the judgment entered by Mills, Judge, at the 7 December 1981 Session of Superior Court, Iredell County.\nKluttz, Hamlin, Reamer, Blankenship and Kluttz by Richard R. Reamer, for defendant-appellant.\nPope and Brawley by William R. Pope, for defendant-appellee, Town of Mooresville.\nWardlow, Knox, Knox, Freeman & Scofield by Charles E. Knox and John S. Freeman, for plaintiff-appellee."
  },
  "file_name": "0148-01",
  "first_page_order": 184,
  "last_page_order": 185
}