Legal Opinion

Abernathy v. . R. R.

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided December 13, 1913PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

After stating the case: We have repeatedly held, since McAdoo v. R. R. (105 N.C. 140) was decided in 1890, nearly a quarter of a century ago, that a person walking along the track of a railroad company must look and listen for approaching trains and take care of himself, and the engineer has the right to assume that he has done so and will leave the track in time to avoid any injury to himself, and having the right to act upon this assumption, he is not guilty of negligence in failing to give signals to the pedestrian. If any injury results to the latter, the law imputes it to his own…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Railroad Company v. HoustonSupreme Court of the United States · 1878
  2. Smith v. Wabash RailroadIndiana Supreme Court · 1895
  3. Meredith v. Richmond & Danville RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1891
  4. High v. Carolina Central RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1893
  5. Norwood v. Raleigh & Gaston RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1892

13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Redmon v. . R. R.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1928
  2. Gunter's Adm'r v. Southern Railway Co.Supreme Court of Virginia · 1920
  3. Dernberger v. Baltimore & O. R. Co.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1917
  4. Ward v. Atlantic Coast Line RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1914
  5. Davis v. Southern Railway Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1916

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API