Legal Opinion

Brazille v. Carolina Barytes Co.

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided December 20, 1911PublishedCited by 8 opinions

Appeal by defendant from Lane, J., at October Term, 1911, of MadisoN.

1Opinion of the Court

Glabk, G. J.

This is an action to recover damages for personal injuries. The plaintiff alleges that the company furnished him and other employees iron tamping rods to be used in tamping dynamite, and while so being used the iron tamping rods caused an explosion which seriously and permanently injured the plaintiff. He further alleges that in a few days after his return from the hospital, and while blind, and suffering in mind and body from said injuries, and mentally incompetent and incapable of transacting any business, the defendant company by fraud and false representation secured his…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Hicks v. . Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1905
  2. Clary's Administrators v. ClarySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1841
  3. Lloyd v. P. H. Hanes & Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1900
  4. Dorsett v. Clement-Ross Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1902
  5. Horah v. . KnoxSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1882

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Deligny v. Tate Furniture Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1915
  2. Cochran v. Young-Hartsell Mills Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1915
  3. Daniel v. . DixonSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1913
  4. Smith v. Massachusetts Bonding & InsuranceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1920
  5. Butler v. Armour Fertilizer WorksSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1927

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

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

Powered by the Exa API