Legal Opinion

Witsell v. . R. R.

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided February 5, 1897PublishedCited by 29 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The statements and declarations of the motorman, made to plaintiff just preceding the accident as to the condition of the track, as to his not having sand and the car being late and overloaded, and the rapidity of the speed, were competent as part of the res gestae and also as fixing the company with knowledge of facts requiring a greater degree of care and prudence than ordinary. 4 Thompson Corp., secs., 4913, 1914; Morawetz Corp., sec. 540a.

Each of the four special instructions asked by the defendant concludes by asking the Court to instruct the jury that the "plaintiff cannot recover." As…

2Cases cited26 opinions

  1. Haynes v. Kaleigh Gas Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1894
  2. Stewart v. Carpet Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1905
  3. Lloyd v. P. H. Hanes & Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1900
  4. Mason v. Richmond & Danville RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1892
  5. Pittsburg, Cincinnati & St. Louis Railway Co. v. ThompsonIllinois Supreme Court · 1870

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

3Cited by29 opinions

  1. Hicks v. . Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1905
  2. Marks v. Cotton Mills.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1904
  3. Pressly v. Yarn Mills.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1905
  4. Deligny v. Tate Furniture Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1915
  5. Greenlee v. . R. R.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1898

24 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