Mullis v. . Sanders
Supreme Court of North Carolina
ActioN, tried before Adams, J., at August Term, 1918, of Union, upon these issues: 1. Did the relation of master and servant exist between defendant and the deceased at the time of the injury and death, as alleged in the - complaint? Answer: “Yes.” 2. Was the death of the plaintiff’s intestate caused by the negligence of the defendant, as alleged in the complaint? Answer: “Yes.” 3. Did the said intestate by his own negligence contribute to the injuries causing his death, as…
Read the full summary
ActioN, tried before Adams, J., at August Term, 1918, of Union, upon these issues: 1. Did the relation of master and servant exist between defendant and the deceased at the time of the injury and death, as alleged in the - complaint? Answer: “Yes.” 2. Was the death of the plaintiff’s intestate caused by the negligence of the defendant, as alleged in the complaint? Answer: “Yes.” 3. Did the said intestate by his own negligence contribute to the injuries causing his death, as alleged in the answer? Answer: “No.” 4. What damages, if any, is the plaintiff entitled to recover? Answer: “$1,000.”…
1Opinion of the CourtBrown, J.
We are of opinion that the motion to nonsuit should have been sustained.
The evidence, taken in the most favorable view for plaintiff, tends to prove these facts: The defendant owned a sawmill and engine and also a tract of timber. He entered into a contract with plaintiff’s intestate to operate the sawmill at intestate’s expense and to haul and cut the timber at $4.25 per thousand feet, the intestate doing all the work and furnishing all the labor. The'intestate put down the sawmill and placed all the machinery in position, and operated it under his own control and in absence of defendant.…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Birmingham Furnace & Manufacturing Co. v. GrossSupreme Court of Alabama · 1892
- Lewis v. SimpsonWashington Supreme Court · 1892
3Cited by1 opinion
- Surratt v. StateSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1970