Legal Opinion
Howard v. . Howard
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Decided April 1, 1931PublishedCited by 57 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtAdams, J.
The suit is in tort, the accident occurred in New Jersey, and the defendant has pleaded the laws of that State in bar of recovery.
The actionable quality of the defendant’s conduct in inflicting injury upon the plaintiff must be determined by the law of the place where the injury was done; that is, the measure of the defendant’s duty and bis liability for negligence must be determined by the law of New Jersey. Goodrich on Conflict of Laws, 188; Hancock v. Telegraph Co., 142 N. C., 163; Harrison v. R. R., 168 N. C., 382; Hipps v. R. R., 177 N. C., 472; Smith v. So. Ry., 69 S. E. (S. C.), 18. If…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Hilton v. GuyotSupreme Court of the United States · 1895
- Bank of Augusta v. EarleSupreme Court of the United States · 1839
- Loucks v. . Standard Oil Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1918
- Dennick v. Railroad Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1881
- Herrick v. Minneapolis & St. Louis Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1883
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by57 opinions
- Boudreau v. BaughmanSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1988
- Charnock v. . TaylorSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1943
- Coster v. CosterNew York Court of Appeals · 1943
- Shaw v. LeeSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1963
- Tennessee Carolina Transportation, Inc. v. Strick Corp.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1973
52 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.