
    PLINIE A. WHITE v. MACK JORDAN and ALPHONZA JORDAN
    No. 719SC207
    (Filed 4 August 1971)
    Automobiles § 53— failure to stay on right side of highway — summary judgment
    In this action to recover for injuries received in an automobile collision, defendants’ motion for summary judgment was properly allowed where they offered a deposition of plaintiff tending to show that the driver of the automobile in which plaintiff was riding lost control of the automobile on an icy road and that it skidded completely into the opposite lane and struck defendants’ oncoming vehicle, which had been driven partially off the highway in an attempt to avoid the collision, and plaintiff submitted nothing in opposition to the motion.
    Appeal by plaintiff from Brewer, Judge, 16 November 1970 Session of Superior Court held in Franklin County.
    Plaintiff instituted this civil action to recover damages for injuries sustained when the automobile in which he was a passenger, and which was being driven by one Hudson, collided, on 17 February 1969, with an automobile being driven by defendant Mack Jordan and owned by defendant Alphonza Jordan.
    Defendants filed a motion for summary judgment and submitted in support thereof the deposition of plaintiff, which tended to show that the driver of the automobile in which plaintiff was riding lost control of the automobile on the icy road and skidded completely into the opposite lane where it struck the oncoming automobile driven by defendant Jordan, who had partially left the road to his right in an attempt to avoid the collision. Plaintiff submitted nothing in opposition to the motion. From the granting of defendants’ motion, and judgment entered thereupon, plaintiff appealed to this Court.
    
      Hubert H. Senter for plaintiff-appellant.
    
    
      Smith, Anderson, Dorsett, Blount & Ragsdale, by James D. Blount, Jr., for defendants-appellees.
    
   BROCK, Judge.

In our opinion, plaintiff’s deposition, offered by defendant upon motion for summary judgment, amply demonstrates that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact, and that defendants are entitled to judgment as a matter of law.

Affirmed.

Judges Morris and Hedrick concur.  