Legal Opinion

Godwin v. Atlantic Coast Line Railroad

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided November 5, 1941PublishedCited by 75 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtStacy, C. J.

The question for decision is whether the plaintiff’s contributory negligence is such as to bar a recovery. The pertinent authorities would seem to suggest an affirmative answer. Temple v. Hawkins, ante, 26; Hampton v. Hawkins, 219 N. C., 205, 13 S. E. (2d), 227; Pitt v. R. R., 203 N. C., 279, 166 S. E., 67; Godwin v. R. R., 202 N. C., 1, 161 S. E., 541; Batchelor v. R. R., 196 N. C., 84, 144 S. E., 542; Harrison v. R. R., 194 N. C., 656, 140 S. E., 598; Elder v. R. R., ibid., 617, 140 S. E., 298; Holton v. R. R., 188 N. C., 277, 124 S. E., 307; Davis v. R. R., 187 N. C., 147, 120 S. E., 827;…

2Cases cited36 opinions

  1. Continental Improvement Co. v. SteadSupreme Court of the United States · 1877
  2. Johnson v. . R. R.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1913
  3. Harrison v. North Carolina RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1927
  4. Murray v. . R. R.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1940
  5. Cooper v. RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1905

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

3Cited by75 opinions

  1. Bundy v. . PowellSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1949
  2. Atkins v. . Transportation Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1944
  3. Tyson v. . FordSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1948
  4. Wagoner v. North Carolina RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1953
  5. Atkins v. White Transportation Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1944

70 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