Opinion
Filed 19 October, 1955.
APPEAL by defendant Herbert L. Gregory from Parker, J., February Term, 1955, of LENOIR.
Owens Langley for plaintiff, appellee.
Whitaker Jeffress for defendant Herbert L. Gregory, appellant.
Civil action growing out of automobile collision that occurred about 11:30 p.m. on 2 May, 1954, at intersection of Washington and Nelson Streets in Kinston.
Plaintiff was driving his 1952 Dodge east along Washington Street; and defendant Herbert L. Gregory, then twenty years of age, was driving a 1954 Chevrolet owned by his sister, Hida Iola Gregory, south along Nelson Street.
Plaintiff's action was against the defendants Gregory for damages on account of personal injuries and damage to his Dodge car, allegedly caused by the negligence of the driver of the Gregory car. Plaintiff alleged that defendant Hilda Iola Gregory was liable on principles of agency. Defendants denied negligence, alleged contributory negligence; and defendant Hilda Iola Gregory alleged a cross action against plaintiff for damages to her Chevrolet car.
Twin States Insurance Company and Motors Insurance Corporation were made parties because of payments made by them to the owners of the Dodge and Chevrolet cars, respectively, under collision insurance policies.
At the close of plaintiff's evidence, the motion of defendant Hilda Iola Gregory for judgment of involuntary nonsuit was allowed. No evidence was offered, and no issues were submitted, bearing upon the alleged cross action of defendant Hilda Iola Gregory.
The jury found that plaintiff was injured and his automobile damaged by the negligence of defendant Herbert L. Gregory, that plaintiff was not contributorily negligent, and awarded damages.
Judgment for plaintiff was entered against defendant Herbert L. Gregory in accordance with the verdict. Defendant Herbert L. Gregory excepted and appealed, assigning as error (1) the court's denial of his motions for judgment of involuntary nonsuit, and (2) alleged errors of commission and of omission in the charge.
Upon a careful review of the evidence, we concur in Judge Parker's denial of appellant's motions for judgment of involuntary nonsuit. Moreover, consideration of the charge fails to disclose any error of law deemed of sufficient prejudicial effect to warrant a new trial. Hence, the verdict and judgment will not be disturbed.
No error.