Darden v. Robert G. Lassiter & Co.
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the Court
Stacy, C. J.,
after stating tbe case: Tbe case, witb evidence sufficient to carry it to tbe jury, was tried upon tbe theory that in law tbe defendant was in duty bound, in tbe exercise of ordinary care, to provide, a reasonably safe place for plaintiff’s intestate to work, and to furnish him reasonably safe means and suitable appliances witb wbicb to execute tbe work assigned, subject to tbe limitation that tbe deceased took upon himself, as an employee or servant of tbe defendant, tbe ordinary risks of danger incident to tbe employment, wbicb were obvious or could have been perceived by him…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- City of Fort Wayne v. ChristieIndiana Supreme Court · 1901
- Lindsey v. Suncrest Lumber Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1925
- Smith v. Kansas CityMissouri Court of Appeals · 1907
- MacE v. . Mineral Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1915
- McDougald v. Town of LumbertonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1901
3Cited by3 opinions
- Woodson v. RowlandSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1991
- Harper v. Murray Construction Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1930
- Woodson v. RowlandSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1991