Legal Opinion

Neal v. . R. R.

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided May 22, 1900PublishedCited by 34 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

CLARK and DOUGLAS, JJ., dissent. The intestate was run over by defendant's train and killed while walking along on the railroad track in Charlotte. The defendant denied negligence, and pleaded contributory negligence. At the close of plaintiff's evidence, the defendant demurred to plaintiff's evidence and moved for judgment of nonsuit, under act of 1897, ch. 109. (635)

His Honor intimated that plaintiff was not entitled to recover, and plaintiff in deference to said intimation submitted to a nonsuit and appealed. This is an action to recover damages for the wrongful killing of Charles M.…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Spruill v. Northwestern Mutual Life InsuranceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1897
  2. Meredith v. Richmond & Danville RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1891
  3. Hinshaw v. Raleigh & Augusta Air Line R. R.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1896
  4. High v. Carolina Central RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1893
  5. Norwood v. Raleigh & Gaston RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1892

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

3Cited by34 opinions

  1. Wall v. . BainSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1942
  2. Redmon v. . R. R.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1928
  3. Cummins v. Southern Fruit Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1945
  4. Mulford v. Cotton States Hotel Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1938
  5. Nowell v. BasnightSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1923

29 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