Legal Opinion

Butler v. Carolina Power & Light Co.

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided September 18, 1940PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSeawell, J.

~We pretermit discussion of the objections and exceptions to the admission and exclusion of evidence, since they do not disclose reversible error. Mostly, they relate to warnings which were given to the plaintiff’s intestate while he was in the tree and are, therefore, within the res gestee. Harrill v. R. R., 132 N. C., 655, 44 S. E., 109.

But the plaintiff contends strongly that the trial court — the general county court of Buncombe County — committed error in declining to submit the tendered issue as to the creation and maintenance of a dangerous nuisance, by reason of which, it is…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. McFarlane v. City of Niagara FallsNew York Court of Appeals · 1928
  2. Godfrey v. . Power Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1925
  3. Swinson v. Cutter Realty Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1931
  4. Hendrix v. Southern Railway Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1929
  5. Harrill v. . R. R.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1903

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Morgan v. High Penn Oil Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1953
  2. Midgett v. North Carolina State Highway CommissionSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1965
  3. Boldridge v. Crowder Construction Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1959
  4. Walden v. MorganCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 2006
  5. Powers v. Planters National Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1941

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API