Legal Opinion

Arrington v. Town of Pinetops

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided September 18, 1929PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBrogden, J.

The plaintiffs seek to recover damages from both defendants upon two theories:

1. That the defendant, Hookerton Terminal Company, negligently excavated around the pole, causing it to slip into the cut and thus leaving the wires, carrying an enormous voltage, only five feet above the ground and adjacent to a cultivated field.

2. That the town of Pinetops was negligent in not discovering the condition of said pole and permitting it to remain in a dangerous situation for an unreasonable length of time.

In Ellis v. Power Co., 193 N. C., 357, 137 S. E., 163, it is declared: “that electric power is an…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Harrington v. Commissioners of WadesboroSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1910
  2. Ferrell v. Dixie Cotton MillsSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1911
  3. Love v. Virginian Power Co.West Virginia Supreme Court · 1920
  4. Helms v. Citizens Light & Power Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1926
  5. Ellis v. Carolina Power & Light Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1927

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

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Carolina Power & Light Co. v. BowmanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1949
  2. Small v. Southern Public Utilities Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1931
  3. Green River Rural Electric Co-Op. Corp. v. BlandfordCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1947
  4. Holding v. Indiana & Michigan Electric Co.Indiana Court of Appeals · 1980
  5. Ford Ex Rel. Ford v. Blythe Bros.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1955

7 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