Legal Opinion

Jackson v. Ayden Lumber Co.

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided March 27, 1912PublishedCited by 10 opinions

Appeal from Cline, J., at October Term, 1911, of "WASHINGTON. Tbe facts are sufficiently stated in the opinion of the Court by Mr. CMef Justice Clark.

1Opinion of the Court

BROWN, J., dissenting; WALKER, J., concurring in dissent. The facts are sufficiently stated in the opinion of the Court by Mr.Chief Justice Clark. The defendant in operating its railroad for hauling out logs used two kinds of machines, one a skidder to draw in the logs and the other a loading machine to lift them up on the cars. The plaintiff's duties were to look after the engines of both these machines, to keep them in repair and to operate the loading engine. The superintendent came through the woods, across the railroad, in front of the operations. The plaintiff stopped his engine and…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Davis v. Keen.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1906
  2. Sigman v. Railroad Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1904
  3. Twiddy v. Dare Lumber Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1911
  4. Mott v. Southern Railway Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1902
  5. Nicholson v. RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1905

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. State v. . DilliardSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1943
  2. Ellis v. . WellonsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1944
  3. Ellis v. WellonsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1944
  4. State v. . WebsterSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1940
  5. Buchanan v. Ritter Lumber Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1915

5 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