Cannaday v. Railroad
Supreme Court of North Carolina
AotioN by James A. Cannaday against Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Company, beard by Judge (?. 8. Ferguson and a jury, at tbe June Term, 1906, of tbe Superior Court of Guilford. This was an action for tbe recovery of damages for personal injury.
Read the full summary
AotioN by James A. Cannaday against Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Company, beard by Judge (?. 8. Ferguson and a jury, at tbe June Term, 1906, of tbe Superior Court of Guilford. This was an action for tbe recovery of damages for personal injury. Tbe facts material to tbe decision of tbe appeal were as follows: Tbe jury found upon issues submitted to them that tbe plaintiff was injured by tbe negligence of tbe defendant, and that be did not, by bis own negligence, contribute thereto. By way of further defense, defendant alleged that prior to bis employment, plaintiff entered into a contract…
1Opinion of the Court
CoNNOR, J.,
after stating the case: It is settled that “Matters bearing upon'the execution, interpretation and validity of a contract are determined by the law of the place where it is made.” Scudder v. Nat. Union Bank, 19 U. S., 406. “The interpretation of a contract and the rights and obligations under it, of the parties thereto, are to be determined in accordance with the proper law of the contract. Prima facie the proper law' of the contract is to be presumed to be the law of the country where it is made.” Dicey Conft. Law, 563. Bowen, L. J., in Jacobs v. Credit Lyonnais, 12 Q. B., 589,…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Hancock v. Telegraph Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1905
- Gooch v. . FaucettSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1898
- Williams v. . CarrSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1879
- Hall v. Telegraph Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1905
- Anderson v. . DoakSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1849
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.