Legal Opinion · Dissent

Harvey, Admr. v. So. Ry. &8212 Car. Div.

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Decided May 1, 1923No. 11207Published

1Dissent

Mr. Justice Cothran,

(dissenting) : There is not a suggestion in the complaint that the plaintiff proposed to rely upon the lack of care on the part of the railroad company in maintaining the approaches to the crossing. As is held in the case of Hill v. R. Co.: “Where a railroad is constructed across an established highway, it is responsible for the safety of the approaches”; and, if the allegations of the complaint had made out a case of this character against the railroad, evidence in support of it and the charge of the Court appropriate thereto would have been entirely proper; but the…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Hardaway v. Southern RailwaySupreme Court of South Carolina · 1912
  2. Johnson v. Southern RailwaySupreme Court of South Carolina · 1898
  3. Jenkins v. McCarthySupreme Court of South Carolina · 1895
  4. Fell v. Railroad Co.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1890
  5. Goodwin v. Charleston & Western Carolina Ry.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1907

1 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