Hall v. Rinehart & Dennis Co.
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Per curiam
Plaintiff’s chief assignment of error urged in the oral argument and discussed in the brief, is to the following charge of the trial judge: “The court charges you as a matter of law that in order that a party may be liable for negligence, it is not necessary that he could have contemplated, or even been able to anticipate the particular consequences which ensued, or the precise injuries sustained by the plaintiff. It is sufficient if by the exercise of reasonable care the defendant might have foreseen that some injury would result from his act or omission, or that consequences of a generally…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Drum v. MillerSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1904
- Hudson v. RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1906
- Chancey v. Norfolk & Western Railway Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1917
- Bowers v. East Tennessee & Western North Carolina RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1907
3Cited by15 opinions
- Cole v. . R. R.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1937
- McIntyre v. Monarch Elevator & MacHine Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1949
- Bechtler v. BrackenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1940
- Bechtler v. . BrackenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1940
- Cole v. Atlantic Coast Line RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1937
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.