Fry v. North Carolina Railroad
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Appeal by defendant from Lyon, J., at January Term, 1912, of MECKLENBURG. Tlie facts are sufficiently stated in the opinion of the Court by Mr. Justice Walker.
1Opinion of the CourtWalker, J.
This action was brought by the plaintiff to recover damages for injuries received while uncoupling an air-hose between two cars, and which he alleges were caused by the negligence of the defendant. The rules of the railroad company prohibited employees from going between cars, while in motion, for the purpose of coupling or uncoupling cars, and plaintiff was aware of this rule at the time of the accident, and knew that he was also forbidden by it to go between cars, while in motion, even by the order of the conductor. He testified that when he was ordered to uncouple cars it was his duty to…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Stewart v. Carpet Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1905
- Pickett v. . R. R.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1895
- Wilkinson v. . DunbarSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1908
- Kinney v. FolkertsMichigan Supreme Court · 1891
- Whitson v. Wrenn.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1903
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Shipp Ex Rel. Shipp v. United Stage Lines, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1926
- Ledford v. Valley River Lumber Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1922
- Murphy v. Suncrest Lumber Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1923
- Stewart v. . Carpet Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1905
- Campbell v. . R. R.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1931
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.