Legal Opinion

Clott v. GREYHOUND LINES, INCORPORATED

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided April 14, 1971No. 18PublishedCited by 18 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

BRANCH, Justice.

Plaintiff contends that the trial judge erred when he granted defendant’s motion for a directed verdict.

Plaintiff, inter alia, contends that defendant became an insurer of his baggage because plaintiff was separated from his baggage by the negligence of defendant’s agents.

If defendant were an insurer, plaintiff would be entitled to recover, without proof of negligence, upon proof of delivery to defendant and of failure of defendant to deliver, unless defendant could carry the burden of showing that the loss was caused by an act of God, the public enemy, the negligence of the…

2Cases cited30 opinions

  1. New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad v. NothnagleSupreme Court of the United States · 1953
  2. Union Pacific Railroad v. BurkeSupreme Court of the United States · 1921
  3. Southeastern Express Co. v. Pastime Amusement Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1936
  4. Bowen v. GardnerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1969
  5. Caten v. Salt City Movers & Storage Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1945

25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. Horne v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1993
  2. Martin v. HareCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1985
  3. Marshall v. MillerCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1980
  4. Beck v. Carolina Power and Light Co.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1982
  5. Cole v. Duke Power Co.Court of Appeals of North Carolina · 1986

13 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