Baldwin v. . Smitherland
Supreme Court of North Carolina
ActioN tried before Lane, The action was to recover damages for breaking the leg of plaintiff’s mule by alleged negligence of defendant in operating an automobile. On denial of liability and on the issue as to negligence there was verdict for defendant. Judgment on the verdict for defendant, and plaintiff excepted and appealed.
1Opinion of the Court
Per Ouriam.
The evidence on the part of plaintiff tended to show that, in October, 1914, while plaintiff was riding his mule along the public road running from Troy to Biscoe, he was negligently run into by defendant operating an automobile, and that the mule’s leg was broken so that it had to be killed. There was also evidence to show that the machine of defendant was without any or without proper brakes, and on this account defendant was unable to control his car, and this was one of the-reasons for the occurrence.
The evidence of the defendant tended to show that, on the occasion in…
2Cited by14 opinions
- Springs v. . DollSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1929
- Riggsby v. TrittonSupreme Court of Virginia · 1925
- Etheridge v. . EtheridgeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1943
- Etheridge v. EtheridgeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1943
- Heffter v. Northern States Power Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1927
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.