The Royal Insurance Co v. Atlantic Coast Line Railroad
Supreme Court of North Carolina
1Opinion of the CourtStacy, C. J.
In bar of plaintiff’s right to recover, the defendant pleads, and,' at the trial, offered evidence tending to show that the burning of the cotton in question was due to the contributory negligence of the owner, Bethune-Colwell & Company. In apt time, the defendant tendered the following issue:
“2. Was Bethune-Colwell & Company guilty of negligence which contributed to the damages for which this action is brought to recover, as alleged in the answer ?”
His Honor declined to submit this issue, doubtless for the reason that the testimony of a number of the defendant’s witnesses was to the effect…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Shell v. . RosemanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1911
- Smith v. Safety Coach Line, Inc.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1926
- Wilson Bros. v. BushWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1911
- Svea Ins. v. Vicksburg, S. & P. Ry. Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Louisiana · 1907
3Cited by4 opinions
- Burgess v. TrevathanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1952
- Security Fire & Indemnity Company v. BarnhardtSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1966
- Insurance Company v. . R. R.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1930
- Royal Insurance v. Atlantic Coast Line RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1930