Legal Opinion

Rice v. Norfolk Southern Railroad

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided October 7, 1914PublishedCited by 5 opinions

Appeal by defendant from Daniels, J., at June Term, 1914, of CAR-TERET. This is an action for damages in diverting and ponding water by tbe defendant’s embankment, causing sickness of plaintiff’s children and tbe loss of their services and tbe expense of tbe doctor’s bill and medicine. Yerdict and judgment for tbe plaintiff. Appeal by tbe defendant.

1Opinion of the Court

Clare, 0. J.

Tbe defendant’s roadbed was constructed at this point in 1906. By reason of tbe embankment in tbe defendant’s track in-front of plaintiff’s bouse surface water was ponded back under tbe bouse. To relieve" this the defendant put a tile drain in this embankment in 1910. Before tbe embankment was' placed there, there was a natural drainage of tbe surface water. Tbe tile drain at first took tbe water off. Afterwards, in 1911, it became clogged, ponding water under tbe bouse, with tbe result, as witnesses testified, of causing plaintiff’s children to have malarial fever. There was…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Duval v. Atlantic Coast Line RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1913

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Thayer v. Denver & Rio Grande R. R.New Mexico Supreme Court · 1916
  2. White v. . Comrs. of JohnstonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1940
  3. Milling Co. v. . Highway CommissionSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1925
  4. Riverview Milling Co. v. State Highway CommissionSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1925
  5. Perry v. Norfolk Southern RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1916

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API