Matthews v. Atlantic & North Carolina Railroad
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Civil aotiomt, tried before Holce, J.and a jury, at May-Term, 1895, of LeNOIr Superior Court. On the conclusion of the testimony, his Honor intimated that, upon the evidence, the plaintiff was not entitled to recover and the plaintiff submitted to a non suit and appealed. The facts appear in the opinion of Chief Justice Eairoloth.
1Opinion of the Court
Faircloth, C. J.:
It is not necessary to enter into a general discussion of the duties and liabilities of a railroad when running its train. The question in this case depends upon the testimony of the plaintiff, as the court held that upon all of his evidence he could not recover, and the case was not submitted to the jury.
The plaintiff testified: “I am 22 years old. Before the injury I was healthy and strong. I lost my arm near Cas-well on defendant road. Was between two culverts, three and a half miles this side of Dover. Was hurt by the connecting rod of the engine; was coming towards…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- High v. Carolina Central RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1893
- Parker v. Wilmington & Weldon RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1882
3Cited by13 opinions
- Pharr v. Southern Railway Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1903
- Ward v. Atlantic Coast Line RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1914
- Davis v. Southern Railway Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1916
- Crenshaw v. Asheville & Biltmore Street Railway & Transportation Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1907
- Crenshaw v. . Street R. R.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1907
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.