Legal Opinion

Bradford v. . English

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided December 16, 1925PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Action for damages on account of negligence. From a judgment for plaintiff the defendant appeals. No error. Plaintiff was "ball-hooting" a "Wahoo" log down the mountain-side. "Ball-hooting" is the process of removing logs down a precipitous side of the mountain, where teams and other customary means cannot be used. The "run" side of the log is "skinned" and the log goes endwise by gravity until it reaches a place where other means can be used to move it. The log, a Wahoo or Indian Bitter, was about 14 inches in diameter and 12 feet long, and very heavy. Grover Anglin, foreman for defendant,…

2Cases cited26 opinions

  1. Northern Pacific Railroad v. HerbertSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
  2. Alabama Great Southern Railway Co. v. ThompsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1906
  3. Cotton v. North Carolina R. R. Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1908
  4. Tanner v. Lumber Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1906
  5. Murphy v. Suncrest Lumber Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1923

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Christie v. Great Northern Railway Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1933
  2. Smith v. . Lumber CompanySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1930
  3. Smith v. Kitchen Lumber Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1930

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API