Legal Opinion · Dissent

Caldwell v. Southern Railway Co.

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided September 18, 1940Published

1Dissent

BaeNhill, J\,

dissenting: In considering the evidence of the plaintiff as to obstructions existing as he approached the crossing where the accident occurred it is necessary to bear in mind that he was speaking as of the time he approached the first track. This is clearly demonstrated by his own evidence.

Yiewing these seven tracks from a northerly to a southerly direction they spread out fan-like so that at the Lee Street crossing there is a space of more than 131 feet from track No. 1 to track No. 7. The distance from the center of track No. 5 to the center of track No. 6 is more than 68 feet…

2Cases cited22 opinions

  1. Grand Trunk Railway Co. v. IvesSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
  2. Beisiegel v. New York Central RailroadNew York Court of Appeals · 1869
  3. Heddles v. Chicago & Northwestern Railway Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1889
  4. Haas v. Grand Rapids & Indiana RailroadMichigan Supreme Court · 1882
  5. Willis v. . New BernSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1926

17 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