Hinkle v. Richmond & Danville Railroad
Supreme Court of North Carolina
This was a civil ACTION, tried at Fall Term, 1891, of the Superior Court of DavidsoN County, before Arm,field, J. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
Avery, J.:
In the absence of statutes regulating the time and manner of giving signals, the failure of an engineer in charge of a locomotive to ring the bell or sound the whistle on approaching the crossing of a public highway, or a point where the public have been habitually permitted to cross, as at the intersection of a mill-road or a farm-road frequently used, is evidence of negligence to be submitted to the jury. 2 Sherman and Red. on Neg., §§463 and 464, Womer v. N. Y. R. R. Co., 44 N. Y., 465; Troy v. Railroad, 99 N. C., 298; 2 Wood R. L., p. 1292; Bary v. Railroad, 92 N. Y., 289.
It is…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Warner v. . the New York Cen. R.R. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1871
- Deans v. Wilmington & Weldon RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1890
- Bullock v. Wilmington & Weldon RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1890
- Troy v. Cape Fear & Yadkin Valley RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1888
- Newson v. . the N.Y.C.R.R. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1864
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by39 opinions
- Florida Central & Peninsular Railroad v. FoxworthSupreme Court of Florida · 1899
- Russell v. Carolina Central R. R.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1896
- Pickett v. . R. R.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1895
- Norton v. North Carolina RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1898
- Pickett v. Wilmington & Weldon RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1895
34 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.