Virginia-Carolina Peanut Co. v. Atlantic Coast Line Railroad
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Appeal from Peebles, J., at tbe December Term, 1910, of MARTIN. Tbe action was to recover damages for negligent delay on tbe part of tbe defendant company in conveying a lot of macbinery shipped over defendant’s road.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Peebles, J., at tbe December Term, 1910, of MARTIN. Tbe action was to recover damages for negligent delay on tbe part of tbe defendant company in conveying a lot of macbinery shipped over defendant’s road. On tbe trial it appeared tbat plaintiff was a corporation doing a general business in manufacturing and cleaning of peanuts, at Williamston, N. C., and tbat in tbe latter part of August, 1907, Eli Gurganus, acting for said company, but without having informed tbe company of this fact, so far as the evidence shows, ordered from tbe Appomattox Iron Works, at Petersburg, Ya., a…
1ConcurrenceBrown, J.
The damages recoverable in an action for a breach of contract are such as naturally flow from the breach and such special and consequential damages as are reasonably presumed to have been within the contemplation of the parties at the time the contract was entered into. Williams v. Telegraph Co., 136 N. C., 82; Johnson v. R. R., 140 N. C., 574. And the same rule is applied in actions for the *156negligent omission in tbe performance of a public duty growing out of contract. Lee v. R. R., 136 N. C., 533, delay in transportation of freight; Williams v. Telegraph Co., 136 N. C., 82, negligence in…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Drum v. MillerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1904
- Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway Co. v. BelcherTexas Supreme Court · 1896
- Williams v. Telegraph Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1904
- Johnson v. Railroad Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1906
- Bourland v. Choctaw, Oklahoma & Gulf Railway Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1906
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.