Legal Opinion · Dissent

Hill v. Broad River Power Co.

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Decided July 5, 1929No. 12696Published

1DissentJustice Coti-iran

(dissenting) : Action for damages on account of the death of the intestate, N. B. Hill, alleged to have been caused by the wrongful act of the defendant.

It appears that, at the time of his injury and death, the intestate was employed by the defendant as foreman of a force of laborers engaged in clearing the land of trees and underbrush over a certain part of its right-of-way acquired for the construction of a power line. Another foreman, of equal rank with Hill, one Derrick, had be'en engaged, the day before the fatal accident to Hill, in similar work, at a point which the area assigned to…

2Cases cited26 opinions

  1. Armour v. HahnSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
  2. Kreigh v. Westinghouse, Church, Kerr & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1909
  3. Central Railroad Company v. KeeganSupreme Court of the United States · 1895
  4. Perry v. . RogersNew York Court of Appeals · 1898
  5. American Bridge Co. v. SeedsCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1906

21 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