
    LARAINE D. KIRKMAN v. JESS L. WILLARD.
    (Filed 20 March 1963.)
    Appeal by defendant from Bone, J., October 1962 Term of New HANOVER.
    Civil action to recover for personal injury and property damage occasioned by a collision of automobiles at a street intersection in the city of Wilmington.
    About 1:15 P.M., 13 March 1958, plaintiff was driving northwardly on North Fifteenth Street, and defendant was driving eastwardly on Chestnut Street. At the intersection of these streets each is 25 to 30 feet wide. There were “Yield Right of Way” signs facing trafile on Fifteenth. A light rain was falling and the street was wet.
    Plaintiff’s version of the accident: Plaintiff stopped before entering the intersection and had a clear view one and a half blocks to her left on Chestnut. She saw no moving vehicle. She started through the intersection at a speed of 2 to 5 miles per hour. She heard brakes squeal. Defendant, about three car-lengths away, was approaching at a speed estimated to be 45 to 50 miles per hour. The front of defendant’s car struck plaintiff’s oar about the left rear door and fender. At the time of impact the rear of plaintiff’s car was about the center of Chestnut Street. The force of the impact turned her car around so that it faced West and stopped about half a car-length north of the intersection. Defendant’s car stopped at the point of impact. Plaintiff was injured and her automobile was damaged.
    Defendant’s version: Defendant was travelling eastwardly on Chestnut Street at about 20 to 25 miles per hour. When about 60 feet from the intersection he saw plaintiff’s car which was about 25 feet south of the intersection. Her speed was 25 to 30 miles per hour. She appeared to slacken speed as if to stop and then increased speed and attempted to cross the intersection in front of defendant. At the time of impact her speed was about 35 miles per hour. Defendant applied brakes, swerved slightly to the left, and skidded about 10 feet before striking plaintiff’s car. Defendant’s car stopped upon impact. It was barely moving at the time of the collision.
    The jury answered issues of negligence, contributory negligence and damages in favor of plaintiff. Prom judgment in accordance with the verdict defendant appeals.
    
      J. H. Ferguson and W. G. Smith for plaintiff.
    
    
      Poisson, Marshall, Barnhill & Williams, and L. Bradford Tillery for defendant.
    
   Per Curiam.

The court properly overruled defendant’s motion -for nonsuit. When considered in the light most favorable to plaintiff the evidence presented issues of fact for jury determination. The assignments of error based -on exceptions to the admission and exclusion of evidence do not disclose error sufficiently prejudicial to warrant a new trial.

No error.  