Legal Opinion

Malcolm v. Mooresville Cotton Mills

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided May 12, 1926PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBrogden, J.

The plaintiff introduced in evidence a part of paragraph five of the answer, as follows: “He was caught in a revolving shaft and received injuries resulting in his death.” Thereafter the defendant offered in evidence a portion of the fifth paragraph of the answer, from which said admission was taken, as follows: “Defendant admits that owing to the carelessness and negligence of plaintiff’s intestate, as hereinbefore alleged, he was caught in a revolving shaft and received injuries resulting in his death.”

The .plaintiff excepted to the action of the trial judge in permitting the defendant to…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. White Ex Rel. White v. HinesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1921
  2. Jones v. Norfolk Southern RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1918
  3. Wade Ex Rel. Moore v. McLean Contracting Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1908
  4. Tudor v. . BowenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1910
  5. State v. HarrisSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1921

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Cox v. Hennis Freight LinesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1952
  2. Slayton v. WrightCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1969
  3. State v. . JacksonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1948
  4. Luther v. First Bank of TroyIdaho Supreme Court · 1943
  5. Hurley v. Gus Blass CompanySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1935

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