Harris v. Charlotte Electric Railway Co.
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Appeal by plaintiff from Webb, J., at January Term, 1913, Of MECKLENBURG. It is alleged that Maggie J. Hartis was injured by the negligence of the defendant on 24 May," 1910, and soon thereafter the said Maggie J. Hartis and her husband commenced' an action against the defendant to recover damages for the injury. During the pendency of that action the deposition of the said Maggie J. Hartis was regularly taken and filed, and thereafter the said Maggie J. Hartis died.
Read the full summary
Appeal by plaintiff from Webb, J., at January Term, 1913, Of MECKLENBURG. It is alleged that Maggie J. Hartis was injured by the negligence of the defendant on 24 May," 1910, and soon thereafter the said Maggie J. Hartis and her husband commenced' an action against the defendant to recover damages for the injury. During the pendency of that action the deposition of the said Maggie J. Hartis was regularly taken and filed, and thereafter the said Maggie J. Hartis died. This action was then commenced by J. M. Hartis, as administrator of his wife, to recover damages for her wrongful death,…
1Opinion of the CourtAlleN, J.
The question presented by this appeal has not been heretofore decided by this Court.
If we adopt the rule prevailing in some jurisdictions, that there must be-an exact identity of parties or of their privies and of causes of action before a deposition taken in one action is admissible in another, we must sustain the ruling of his Honor, because we have recently held in Broadnax v. Broadnax that damages for wrongful death are not in the usual acceptation of the term a part of the personal estate, of the deceased, and in Hood v. Telegraph Co., ante, 92, that the administrator or executor does…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Indianapolis & St. Louis Railroad v. StoutIndiana Supreme Court · 1876
- St. Louis Southwestern Railway Co. v. HengstCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1904
- Miller v. GillispieWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1903
- Andricus' Adm'r v. Pineville Coal Co.Court of Appeals of Kentucky · 1906
- Watson v. St. Paul City Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1899
3Cited by5 opinions
- State Ex Rel. Thomas v. DauesSupreme Court of Missouri · 1926
- Hall v. . R. R.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1907
- Dowell v. City of RaleighSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1917
- State v. . PrevoSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1919
- Dowell v. . RaleighSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1917