Murray v. Atlantic Coast Line Railroad
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1DissentSeawell, J.
I regard the decision in this case as a very serious departure from recognized principles of the law of negligence, which may have an important and injurious effect on the safety of the *406highway. In all three of its major aspects, I must dissent from the deciding opinion.
I do not agree that the court has been vested with the power to sum up the things done by the defendant in discharge of its duty to furnish plaintiff, its employee, a reasonably safe place in which to work, and to affirmatively declare them to be a sufficient compliance with the rule of the ordinarily prudent man, and that…
2Cases cited26 opinions
- Milwaukee & Saint Paul Railway Co. v. KelloggSupreme Court of the United States · 1877
- Wilmington Star Mining Co. v. FultonSupreme Court of the United States · 1907
- Harton v. . Telephone Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1906
- Drum v. MillerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1904
- Hinnant v. Atlantic Coast Line RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1932
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.