Claris v. Norfolk Southern Railroad
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Appeal by plaintiff from Peebles, J., at September Term, 1914, of Pitt. Action to recover damages for the diversion of water. The defendant denied that it had diverted any water to the injury of the plaintiff, and relied upon the plea of the statute of limitations.
Read the full summary
Appeal by plaintiff from Peebles, J., at September Term, 1914, of Pitt. Action to recover damages for the diversion of water. The defendant denied that it had diverted any water to the injury of the plaintiff, and relied upon the plea of the statute of limitations. The action was commenced 1 March, 1912, and was tried in September, 1914. Plaintiff introduced the following evidence: W. P. Clark, plaintiff, testified: That he is the owner of the land described in the complaint, which is the same land described in the deed from John T. Bruce to himself, and that he has been living on said land…
1Opinion of the Court
AlleN, J\
The statute of limitations applicable to the plaintiff’s cause of action is section 394, subsection 2, of the Revisal, which limits the time within which an action may be brought to five years from the time the cause of action accrues, and in Duval v. R. R., 161 N. C., 450, the Court, speaking of this section, says: “Construing the section, the Court has several times held that for such an injury recovery must be for the entire wrong, and the cause of action accrues when the first substantial *417injury is caused by reason of any structure of a railroad of a permanent nature”; and to the…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Staton v. Atlantic Coast Line RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1908
- Duval v. Atlantic Coast Line RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1913
- Stack v. RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1905
- Campbell v. Raleigh & Charleston RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1912