Gurley v. Southern Power Co.
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Appeal at February Term, 1916, of Gutlfobd, from Cline, J., upon these issues: 1. Was the death of the plaintiff’s intestate caused by the negligence of the defendants, as alleged in the complaint? Answer: “Yes; both of them.” 2. What damage, if any, is plaintiff entitled to recover of defendant? Answer: “$10,000.” From the judgment rendered, defendants appealed.
1Opinion of the Court
CLARK, C. J., dissents in part. 1. Was the death of the plaintiff's intestate caused by the negligence of the defendants, as alleged in the complaint? Answer: "Yes; both of them."(691) 2. What damage, if any, is plaintiff entitled to recover of defendant? Answer: "$10,000."
From the judgment rendered, defendants appealed. This is an action by the administratrix of Samuel Shropshire, a boy of 13 or 14, who was drowned in a tank at a substation of the Southern Power Company at High Point. In this substation there is a reservoir, the walls of which are made of cement, which tank is 30 feet long,…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- Peters v. BowmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
- Daniel v. RailroadSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1904
- Linville v. . NissenSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1913
- Savannah, Florida & Western Railway Co. v. BeaversSupreme Court of Georgia · 1901
- Klix v. NiemanWisconsin Supreme Court · 1887
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by23 opinions
- Martin v. Greensboro-Fayetteville Bus LineSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1929
- Deuchar v. Foland Ranch, Inc.South Dakota Supreme Court · 1987
- Bryant v. WoodliefSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1960
- Van Landingham Ex Rel. Van Landingham v. Singer Sewing MacHine Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1934
- Smith v. . Duke UniversitySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1941
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.