Townsend v. McLean Construction Co.
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Appeal by defendant from Bragaw, J., at June Special Term, 1912, of PasquotaNK. Civil action. Tbe following issues were submitted to tbe jury: First. Was plaintiff’s vessel injured by tbe negligence of tbe defendants, as alleged? Answer: Yes. Second. Did tbe plaintiffs by tbeir own negligence contribute to tbeir injury? Answer: No. Third. What damage, if any, have plaintiffs sustained? Answer: $500. Fourth.
Read the full summary
Appeal by defendant from Bragaw, J., at June Special Term, 1912, of PasquotaNK. Civil action. Tbe following issues were submitted to tbe jury: First. Was plaintiff’s vessel injured by tbe negligence of tbe defendants, as alleged? Answer: Yes. Second. Did tbe plaintiffs by tbeir own negligence contribute to tbeir injury? Answer: No. Third. What damage, if any, have plaintiffs sustained? Answer: $500. Fourth. Was tbe property of E. S. Neal injured by tbe neg-, ligence of plaintiff Townsend, as alleged in answer? Answer: . Fifth. What damage has defendant R. S. Neal sustained thereby? Answer: .
1Opinion of the CourtBrown, J.
This action is brought to recover damages against tbe defendant construction, company for an injury to tbe defendants’ vessel, a three-masted schooner called tbe “Edna A. Pogue,” while attempting to pass through an opening in the bridge across Albemarle Sound, en route from Elizabeth City to Plymouth for a cargo.
There are * several assignments of error contained in the record, but we deem it unnecessary to consider more than one or two. Tbe defendants request tbe court to instruct tbe jury that if they believe tbe .evidence they should answer tbe first issue “No.” This prayer for instruction,…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Casement v. BrownSupreme Court of the United States · 1893
- Whitehurst v. Norfolk Southern RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1911
- Maxon v. Chicago & N. W. Ry. Co.District Court, E.D. Wisconsin · 1903
- Wilson v. City of ChicagoDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 1890