Legal Opinion

Peebles v. . N.C. R. R. Co.

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided January 5, 1869PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

His Honor allowed the motion, and the defendant appealed. Damages to cover costs and charges, or loss of time, or permanent injury to the person, or pain and suffering even, are not vindictive, butcompensatory, Sedge Dam. 38, 452, 529; Mayne, Dam. 264. Rev. Code ch. 1, § 1, compared with §§ 8 and 9. Legislation and the decisions of the Courts, have wrought great changes in the common law upon this subject, so that we may now say that the maxim "actio personalis moritur cum persona" is itself dead, or rather has lost so much of its vitality as to be of very little use.

The general rule now is…

2Cited by2 opinions

  1. Hannah v. Richmond & Danville RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1882
  2. Shields v. . Lawrence Col. of Margaret W. DavisSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1875

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

Powered by the Exa API