Hutchins v. . Taylor-Buick Company
Cases that cite this one
16 later published cases cite this decision.
- Dellinger v. Bridges (N.C. 1963)
- Schlamowitz v. Pinehurst, Inc. (District Court, M.D. North Carolina 1964)
- Sumsion v. Streator-Smith, Inc. (Utah 1943)
- Wellington-Sears Co. v. Finishing Works (N.C. 1949)
- Wellington-Sears Co. v. Kerr Bleaching & Finishing Works, Inc. (N.C. 1949)
- Olan Mills, Inc. v. Cannon Aircraft Executive Terminal, Inc. (N.C. 1968)
- Pinehurst, Inc., Pinehurst Driving & Training Club, Inc., and John Edmunds, D/B/A Edmunds Stable v. Sheila Schlamowitz (4th Cir. 1965)
- M. B. Haynes Electric Corp. v. Justice Aero Co. (N.C. 1965)
- Redfoot v. J. T. Jenkins Co. (Cal. Ct. App. 1955)
- Prettyman v. Hopkins Motor Co. (W. Va. 1954)
- Millers Mutual Insurance Ass'n of Illinois v. Atkinson Motors, Inc. (N.C. 1954)
- Bennett v. Atlantic Coast Line Railroad (N.C. 1950)
- Barnard v. Howard Sober, Inc. (N.C. 1946)
- Falls v. . Goforth (N.C. 1939)
- Swain v. Twin City Motor Co. (N.C. 1935)
- Independent Oil Co. v. Broadfoot Iron Works, Inc. (N.C. 1937)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
after stating the case: The appeal presents the single question as to whether the facts of the instant case bring it within the principle announced in Beck v. Wilkins, 179 N. C., 231, 102 S. E., 313, or the rule applied in Morgan v. Bank, 190 N. C., 209, 129 S. E., 585. We think the case is controlled by the decisions in Beck v. Wilkins, supra, and Hanes v. Shapiro, 168 N. C., 24, 84 S. E., 33.
The relation of plaintiff and defendant was that of bailor and bailee. Ordinarily the liability of a bailee for the safe return of the thing bailed is made to depend upon the presence or absence of negligence. In proving this, the bailor has the laboring oar, but it has been held in a number of cases that a prima facie showing of negligence is made out when it is established that the bailee received the property in good condition and failed to return it, or returned it in a damaged condition. Trustees v. Banking Co., 182 N. C., 298, at page 305, 109 S. E., 6.
*779 In tbe absence of some fatal admission or confession, as against a demurrer to tbe evidence, or motion to nonsuit, a prima facie showing carries tbe case to tbe jury. Jeffrey v. Mfg. Co., 197 N. C., 724, 150 S. E., 503; Speas v. Bank, 188 N. C., 524, 125 S. E., 398.
Reversed.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.