Legal Opinion

Keller v. . Furniture Co.

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided September 17, 1930PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Action for damages for personal injury. At the time of his injury the plaintiff was a minor and an employee of the defendant. He was engaged in the work of tailing a planer, i. e., "taking away the timbers after they went through the machine." The planer was run by a belt and pulley. The pulley was very near the floor and was not incased. There is evidence that the floor was greasy and uneven. The plaintiff's narrative of the injury is as follows: "When we got the truck rolled up to the machine I started around to my place where I was to be, and just as I made the turn to go around the floor…

2Cases cited25 opinions

  1. Britt v. Carolina Northern RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1908
  2. Wallace v. Western N. C. RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1889
  3. Hodges v. WilsonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1914
  4. State v. . BryantSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1925
  5. State v. DavenportSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1911

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

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. State v. MintonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1952
  2. State v. SandersSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1970
  3. Hoke v. Atlantic Greyhound Corp.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1947
  4. State v. . KingSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1945
  5. Fincher v. RhyneSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1965

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