Legal Opinion · Dissent
Cole v. . R. R.
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Decided September 10, 1930PublishedCited by 15 opinions
1DissentStacy, C. J.
This is an action to recover damages for personal injury under the Federal Employers' Liability Act. It is admitted that at the time of the injury the defendant was engaged in and the plaintiff was employed by the defendant in interstate commerce. The plaintiff is a machinist. On 15 October, 1926, he was ordered by the defendant's foreman to repair a locomotive engine which was on the defendant's repair track in Durham. The right link saddle pin had been broken and the right tumbling shaft had been bent and twisted underneath the engine. The plaintiff was to make the repairs by going under…
2Cases cited36 opinions
- Milwaukee & Saint Paul Railway Co. v. KelloggSupreme Court of the United States · 1877
- Seaboard Air Line Railway v. HortonSupreme Court of the United States · 1914
- Hough v. Railway Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1880
- Mondou v. New York, New Haven & Hartford RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1912
- Northern Pacific Railroad v. HerbertSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
31 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Wilson v. . MassageeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1944
- Wilson v. MassageeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1944
- Hamilton v. . R. R.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1931
- Atlantic Coast Line R. Co. v. CravenCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1950
- Newbern v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1934
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.